From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-12.7 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,MENTIONS_GIT_HOSTING, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0EC20C433E6 for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2021 09:27:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B8F12233EA for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2021 09:27:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728222AbhAHJ1n (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Jan 2021 04:27:43 -0500 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:51240 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727416AbhAHJ1m (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Jan 2021 04:27:42 -0500 Received: by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D459623383; Fri, 8 Jan 2021 09:26:59 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1610098021; bh=OK/mYSs9iM/Xc5hxkZH354NtxXCpKfdWVjsPjgRbISk=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=C5qyhiKjMN7La52qc6rSqYAOnndCr76SYaP4nS6fmGU4KOHTk7A9TbGUuWuP47r2i 7K81EAa64FipzxuKipWJx2HAi9c41nOqvh7XWK2F8/Q8ioih0CkDJOIuNr97Sd059s fwQz1R6BcTeHg/wuO4Y006iJdGIR9VLJNCjXxsrvkIlZ/FQpsMFVauV8FA73sDUNVY owqzKKU4zPGpaEZZqrqik0Uve0hmVAZ2i4Lvc5KIseuYQ5i/QsYOPOfIPwS7IimOkL ejnpVJIy37QEIEs6YiasyhF33mldMpxfo0qTWnYiE9gM6mwpbsPJcZtqD9S7R2zSQu vpjjsMgaI6yvQ== Date: Fri, 8 Jan 2021 09:26:56 +0000 From: Will Deacon To: Peter Zijlstra Cc: Arnd Bergmann , Russell King - ARM Linux admin , linux-toolchains@vger.kernel.org, Mark Rutland , Theodore Ts'o , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Andreas Dilger , Ext4 Developers List , Linux ARM , Linus Torvalds Subject: Re: Aarch64 EXT4FS inode checksum failures - seems to be weak memory ordering issues Message-ID: <20210108092655.GA4031@willie-the-truck> References: <20210106115359.GB26994@C02TD0UTHF1T.local> <20210106135253.GJ1551@shell.armlinux.org.uk> <20210106172033.GA2165@willie-the-truck> <20210106223223.GM1551@shell.armlinux.org.uk> <20210107111841.GN1551@shell.armlinux.org.uk> <20210107124506.GO1551@shell.armlinux.org.uk> <20210107133747.GP1551@shell.armlinux.org.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Jan 08, 2021 at 10:21:54AM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Thu, Jan 07, 2021 at 10:20:38PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 7, 2021 at 2:37 PM Russell King - ARM Linux admin > > > > So, do we raise the minimum gcc version for the kernel as a whole to 5.1 > > > or just for aarch64? > > > > I'd personally love to see gcc-5 as the global minimum version, as that > > would let us finally use --std=gnu11 features instead of gnu89. [There are > > a couple of useful features that are incompatible with gnu89, and > > gnu99/gnu11 support in gcc didn't like the kernel sources] > > +1 for raising the tree-wide minimum (again!). We actually have a bunch > of work-arounds for 4.9 bugs we can get rid of as well. We even just added another one for arm64 KVM! [1] So yes, I'm in favour of leaving gcc 4.9 to rot as well, especially after this ext4 debugging experience. Will [1] https://git.kernel.org/linus/9fd339a45be5 From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.7 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,MENTIONS_GIT_HOSTING,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9EE78C433DB for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2021 09:29:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: from merlin.infradead.org (merlin.infradead.org [205.233.59.134]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3B58C23383 for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2021 09:29:15 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 3B58C23383 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=kernel.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=merlin.20170209; h=Sender:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-Type:Cc:List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post:List-Archive: List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:References:Message-ID: Subject:To:From:Date:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Owner; bh=5C0IFBM3eRYICDOcGIngEfVEzzsKw9PYAnL7pbvX8j4=; b=0oshJD3P5h6nb7KwwpydXG+Sb yQHx0HomuK1v2mGyse8zRItBHmg4aRQ1hMtOZYJVHDW1ZKRDMxOLyJWncxx7gwu7IGUk1SjBsIGdU 9Od7xR5J1k0QU4Wp4wnJpev+XN5FtQk5Bu9H0sDr3COuwfvbOG5Sj31DWY75qL70EwxQKKt7RVAF0 CSZTMZ3LwtritUz9d9FGhiK2ZjudsXDKj189UCCc6OXTgArn/km7/n6Sg1pzJZYDVuf7gYXb0aZF7 Lokk2iOLt3oa4bVvqmPG2Fm8Ns0FdGz3j5bFvVDsymSgGK1oDPD6ztn7+Wtr7hHDFkZ18jLnNULj6 PTiwYDxTg==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=merlin.infradead.org) by merlin.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1kxo30-0003ac-3N; Fri, 08 Jan 2021 09:27:06 +0000 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]) by merlin.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1kxo2w-0003ZR-MO for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Fri, 08 Jan 2021 09:27:03 +0000 Received: by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D459623383; Fri, 8 Jan 2021 09:26:59 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1610098021; bh=OK/mYSs9iM/Xc5hxkZH354NtxXCpKfdWVjsPjgRbISk=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=C5qyhiKjMN7La52qc6rSqYAOnndCr76SYaP4nS6fmGU4KOHTk7A9TbGUuWuP47r2i 7K81EAa64FipzxuKipWJx2HAi9c41nOqvh7XWK2F8/Q8ioih0CkDJOIuNr97Sd059s fwQz1R6BcTeHg/wuO4Y006iJdGIR9VLJNCjXxsrvkIlZ/FQpsMFVauV8FA73sDUNVY owqzKKU4zPGpaEZZqrqik0Uve0hmVAZ2i4Lvc5KIseuYQ5i/QsYOPOfIPwS7IimOkL ejnpVJIy37QEIEs6YiasyhF33mldMpxfo0qTWnYiE9gM6mwpbsPJcZtqD9S7R2zSQu vpjjsMgaI6yvQ== Date: Fri, 8 Jan 2021 09:26:56 +0000 From: Will Deacon To: Peter Zijlstra Subject: Re: Aarch64 EXT4FS inode checksum failures - seems to be weak memory ordering issues Message-ID: <20210108092655.GA4031@willie-the-truck> References: <20210106115359.GB26994@C02TD0UTHF1T.local> <20210106135253.GJ1551@shell.armlinux.org.uk> <20210106172033.GA2165@willie-the-truck> <20210106223223.GM1551@shell.armlinux.org.uk> <20210107111841.GN1551@shell.armlinux.org.uk> <20210107124506.GO1551@shell.armlinux.org.uk> <20210107133747.GP1551@shell.armlinux.org.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20210108_042702_850315_1AFD9D38 X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 15.88 ) X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Mark Rutland , Arnd Bergmann , Theodore Ts'o , Russell King - ARM Linux admin , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Andreas Dilger , linux-toolchains@vger.kernel.org, Ext4 Developers List , Linus Torvalds , Linux ARM Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org On Fri, Jan 08, 2021 at 10:21:54AM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Thu, Jan 07, 2021 at 10:20:38PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 7, 2021 at 2:37 PM Russell King - ARM Linux admin > > > > So, do we raise the minimum gcc version for the kernel as a whole to 5.1 > > > or just for aarch64? > > > > I'd personally love to see gcc-5 as the global minimum version, as that > > would let us finally use --std=gnu11 features instead of gnu89. [There are > > a couple of useful features that are incompatible with gnu89, and > > gnu99/gnu11 support in gcc didn't like the kernel sources] > > +1 for raising the tree-wide minimum (again!). We actually have a bunch > of work-arounds for 4.9 bugs we can get rid of as well. We even just added another one for arm64 KVM! [1] So yes, I'm in favour of leaving gcc 4.9 to rot as well, especially after this ext4 debugging experience. Will [1] https://git.kernel.org/linus/9fd339a45be5 _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel