[PATCH] [RFC] arm64: export this_cpu_has_cap

[PATCH] [RFC] arm64: export this_cpu_has_cap

[Arnd Bergmann]

From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>

It's now used in a coresight driver that can be a loadable module:

ERROR: modpost: "this_cpu_has_cap" [drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-trbe.ko] undefined!

Fixes: 8a1065127d95 ("coresight: trbe: Add infrastructure for Errata handling")
Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
---
Not sure if we actually want this to be exported, this is my local
workaround for the randconfig build bot.
---
 arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c | 1 +
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)

diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c
index ecbdff795f5e..beccbcfa7391 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c
+++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c
@@ -2864,6 +2864,7 @@ bool this_cpu_has_cap(unsigned int n)
 
 	return false;
 }
+EXPORT_SYMBOL(this_cpu_has_cap);
 
 /*
  * This helper function is used in a narrow window when,
-- 
2.29.2

[PATCH] [RFC] arm64: export this_cpu_has_cap

[Arnd Bergmann]

From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>

It's now used in a coresight driver that can be a loadable module:

ERROR: modpost: "this_cpu_has_cap" [drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-trbe.ko] undefined!

Fixes: 8a1065127d95 ("coresight: trbe: Add infrastructure for Errata handling")
Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
---
Not sure if we actually want this to be exported, this is my local
workaround for the randconfig build bot.
---
 arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c | 1 +
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)

diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c
index ecbdff795f5e..beccbcfa7391 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c
+++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c
@@ -2864,6 +2864,7 @@ bool this_cpu_has_cap(unsigned int n)
 
 	return false;
 }
+EXPORT_SYMBOL(this_cpu_has_cap);
 
 /*
  * This helper function is used in a narrow window when,
-- 
2.29.2


_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

Re: [PATCH] [RFC] arm64: export this_cpu_has_cap

[Suzuki K Poulose]

Hi Arnd

Thanks for the fix.

On 29/10/2021 12:30, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
> 
> It's now used in a coresight driver that can be a loadable module:
> 
> ERROR: modpost: "this_cpu_has_cap" [drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-trbe.ko] undefined!
> 
> Fixes: 8a1065127d95 ("coresight: trbe: Add infrastructure for Errata handling")

Reviewed-by: Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>
Tested-by: Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>

Will, Catalin, Mathieu,

Do you have a preference on how this fix can be pulled in ? This may
be safe to go via coresight tree if it is not too late. Otherwise,
it could go via the arm64 tree.

Suzuki

> Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
> ---
> Not sure if we actually want this to be exported, this is my local
> workaround for the randconfig build bot.
> ---
>   arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c | 1 +
>   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c
> index ecbdff795f5e..beccbcfa7391 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c
> @@ -2864,6 +2864,7 @@ bool this_cpu_has_cap(unsigned int n)
>   
>   	return false;
>   }
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(this_cpu_has_cap);
>   
>   /*
>    * This helper function is used in a narrow window when,
> 

Re: [PATCH] [RFC] arm64: export this_cpu_has_cap

[Suzuki K Poulose]

Hi Arnd

Thanks for the fix.

On 29/10/2021 12:30, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
> 
> It's now used in a coresight driver that can be a loadable module:
> 
> ERROR: modpost: "this_cpu_has_cap" [drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-trbe.ko] undefined!
> 
> Fixes: 8a1065127d95 ("coresight: trbe: Add infrastructure for Errata handling")

Reviewed-by: Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>
Tested-by: Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>

Will, Catalin, Mathieu,

Do you have a preference on how this fix can be pulled in ? This may
be safe to go via coresight tree if it is not too late. Otherwise,
it could go via the arm64 tree.

Suzuki

> Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
> ---
> Not sure if we actually want this to be exported, this is my local
> workaround for the randconfig build bot.
> ---
>   arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c | 1 +
>   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c
> index ecbdff795f5e..beccbcfa7391 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c
> @@ -2864,6 +2864,7 @@ bool this_cpu_has_cap(unsigned int n)
>   
>   	return false;
>   }
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(this_cpu_has_cap);
>   
>   /*
>    * This helper function is used in a narrow window when,
> 


_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

Re: [PATCH] [RFC] arm64: export this_cpu_has_cap

[Mathieu Poirier]

On Fri, 29 Oct 2021 at 07:31, Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Arnd
>
> Thanks for the fix.
>
> On 29/10/2021 12:30, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
> >
> > It's now used in a coresight driver that can be a loadable module:
> >
> > ERROR: modpost: "this_cpu_has_cap" [drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-trbe.ko] undefined!
> >
> > Fixes: 8a1065127d95 ("coresight: trbe: Add infrastructure for Errata handling")
>
> Reviewed-by: Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>
> Tested-by: Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>
>
> Will, Catalin, Mathieu,
>
> Do you have a preference on how this fix can be pulled in ? This may
> be safe to go via coresight tree if it is not too late. Otherwise,
> it could go via the arm64 tree.

All the same to me.  It's in arm64 so I'll let Will and Catalin have
the final word.

>
> Suzuki
>
> > Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
> > ---
> > Not sure if we actually want this to be exported, this is my local
> > workaround for the randconfig build bot.
> > ---
> >   arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c | 1 +
> >   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c
> > index ecbdff795f5e..beccbcfa7391 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c
> > +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c
> > @@ -2864,6 +2864,7 @@ bool this_cpu_has_cap(unsigned int n)
> >
> >       return false;
> >   }
> > +EXPORT_SYMBOL(this_cpu_has_cap);
> >
> >   /*
> >    * This helper function is used in a narrow window when,
> >
>

Re: [PATCH] [RFC] arm64: export this_cpu_has_cap

[Mathieu Poirier]

On Fri, 29 Oct 2021 at 07:31, Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Arnd
>
> Thanks for the fix.
>
> On 29/10/2021 12:30, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
> >
> > It's now used in a coresight driver that can be a loadable module:
> >
> > ERROR: modpost: "this_cpu_has_cap" [drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-trbe.ko] undefined!
> >
> > Fixes: 8a1065127d95 ("coresight: trbe: Add infrastructure for Errata handling")
>
> Reviewed-by: Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>
> Tested-by: Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>
>
> Will, Catalin, Mathieu,
>
> Do you have a preference on how this fix can be pulled in ? This may
> be safe to go via coresight tree if it is not too late. Otherwise,
> it could go via the arm64 tree.

All the same to me.  It's in arm64 so I'll let Will and Catalin have
the final word.

>
> Suzuki
>
> > Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
> > ---
> > Not sure if we actually want this to be exported, this is my local
> > workaround for the randconfig build bot.
> > ---
> >   arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c | 1 +
> >   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c
> > index ecbdff795f5e..beccbcfa7391 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c
> > +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c
> > @@ -2864,6 +2864,7 @@ bool this_cpu_has_cap(unsigned int n)
> >
> >       return false;
> >   }
> > +EXPORT_SYMBOL(this_cpu_has_cap);
> >
> >   /*
> >    * This helper function is used in a narrow window when,
> >
>

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

Re: [PATCH] [RFC] arm64: export this_cpu_has_cap

[Catalin Marinas]

On Fri, Oct 29, 2021 at 02:31:23PM +0100, Suzuki K Poulose wrote:
> On 29/10/2021 12:30, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
> > 
> > It's now used in a coresight driver that can be a loadable module:
> > 
> > ERROR: modpost: "this_cpu_has_cap" [drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-trbe.ko] undefined!
> > 
> > Fixes: 8a1065127d95 ("coresight: trbe: Add infrastructure for Errata handling")
> 
> Reviewed-by: Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>
> Tested-by: Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>
> 
> Will, Catalin, Mathieu,
> 
> Do you have a preference on how this fix can be pulled in ? This may
> be safe to go via coresight tree if it is not too late. Otherwise,
> it could go via the arm64 tree.

I think Will already closed/tagged the arm64 tree for the upcoming
merging window, though he could take it as a fix afterwards.

If it doesn't conflict with the arm64 for-next/core, it's fine by me to
go through the coresight tree.

> > Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
> > ---
> > Not sure if we actually want this to be exported, this is my local
> > workaround for the randconfig build bot.
> > ---
> >   arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c | 1 +
> >   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> > 
> > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c
> > index ecbdff795f5e..beccbcfa7391 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c
> > +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c
> > @@ -2864,6 +2864,7 @@ bool this_cpu_has_cap(unsigned int n)
> >   	return false;
> >   }
> > +EXPORT_SYMBOL(this_cpu_has_cap);

EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL? I think this_cpu_has_cap() is a bit more more
specialised than cpus_have_const_cap().

With that:

Acked-by: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>

Re: [PATCH] [RFC] arm64: export this_cpu_has_cap

[Catalin Marinas]

On Fri, Oct 29, 2021 at 02:31:23PM +0100, Suzuki K Poulose wrote:
> On 29/10/2021 12:30, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
> > 
> > It's now used in a coresight driver that can be a loadable module:
> > 
> > ERROR: modpost: "this_cpu_has_cap" [drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-trbe.ko] undefined!
> > 
> > Fixes: 8a1065127d95 ("coresight: trbe: Add infrastructure for Errata handling")
> 
> Reviewed-by: Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>
> Tested-by: Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>
> 
> Will, Catalin, Mathieu,
> 
> Do you have a preference on how this fix can be pulled in ? This may
> be safe to go via coresight tree if it is not too late. Otherwise,
> it could go via the arm64 tree.

I think Will already closed/tagged the arm64 tree for the upcoming
merging window, though he could take it as a fix afterwards.

If it doesn't conflict with the arm64 for-next/core, it's fine by me to
go through the coresight tree.

> > Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
> > ---
> > Not sure if we actually want this to be exported, this is my local
> > workaround for the randconfig build bot.
> > ---
> >   arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c | 1 +
> >   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> > 
> > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c
> > index ecbdff795f5e..beccbcfa7391 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c
> > +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c
> > @@ -2864,6 +2864,7 @@ bool this_cpu_has_cap(unsigned int n)
> >   	return false;
> >   }
> > +EXPORT_SYMBOL(this_cpu_has_cap);

EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL? I think this_cpu_has_cap() is a bit more more
specialised than cpus_have_const_cap().

With that:

Acked-by: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

Re: [PATCH] [RFC] arm64: export this_cpu_has_cap

[Will Deacon]

On Fri, Oct 29, 2021 at 07:06:23PM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 29, 2021 at 02:31:23PM +0100, Suzuki K Poulose wrote:
> > On 29/10/2021 12:30, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > > From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
> > > 
> > > It's now used in a coresight driver that can be a loadable module:
> > > 
> > > ERROR: modpost: "this_cpu_has_cap" [drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-trbe.ko] undefined!
> > > 
> > > Fixes: 8a1065127d95 ("coresight: trbe: Add infrastructure for Errata handling")
> > 
> > Reviewed-by: Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>
> > Tested-by: Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>
> > 
> > Will, Catalin, Mathieu,
> > 
> > Do you have a preference on how this fix can be pulled in ? This may
> > be safe to go via coresight tree if it is not too late. Otherwise,
> > it could go via the arm64 tree.
> 
> I think Will already closed/tagged the arm64 tree for the upcoming
> merging window, though he could take it as a fix afterwards.
> 
> If it doesn't conflict with the arm64 for-next/core, it's fine by me to
> go through the coresight tree.
> 
> > > Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
> > > ---
> > > Not sure if we actually want this to be exported, this is my local
> > > workaround for the randconfig build bot.
> > > ---
> > >   arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c | 1 +
> > >   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c
> > > index ecbdff795f5e..beccbcfa7391 100644
> > > --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c
> > > +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c
> > > @@ -2864,6 +2864,7 @@ bool this_cpu_has_cap(unsigned int n)
> > >   	return false;
> > >   }
> > > +EXPORT_SYMBOL(this_cpu_has_cap);
> 
> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL? I think this_cpu_has_cap() is a bit more more
> specialised than cpus_have_const_cap().
> 
> With that:
> 
> Acked-by: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>

Yes, at this stage I think it's best for this to go via the Coresight tree.
So with the _GPL export:

Acked-by: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>

If that doesn't work for some reason, I can take it next week after the
initial arm64 queue has been merged. Please just let me know.

Will

Re: [PATCH] [RFC] arm64: export this_cpu_has_cap

[Will Deacon]

On Fri, Oct 29, 2021 at 07:06:23PM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 29, 2021 at 02:31:23PM +0100, Suzuki K Poulose wrote:
> > On 29/10/2021 12:30, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > > From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
> > > 
> > > It's now used in a coresight driver that can be a loadable module:
> > > 
> > > ERROR: modpost: "this_cpu_has_cap" [drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-trbe.ko] undefined!
> > > 
> > > Fixes: 8a1065127d95 ("coresight: trbe: Add infrastructure for Errata handling")
> > 
> > Reviewed-by: Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>
> > Tested-by: Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>
> > 
> > Will, Catalin, Mathieu,
> > 
> > Do you have a preference on how this fix can be pulled in ? This may
> > be safe to go via coresight tree if it is not too late. Otherwise,
> > it could go via the arm64 tree.
> 
> I think Will already closed/tagged the arm64 tree for the upcoming
> merging window, though he could take it as a fix afterwards.
> 
> If it doesn't conflict with the arm64 for-next/core, it's fine by me to
> go through the coresight tree.
> 
> > > Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
> > > ---
> > > Not sure if we actually want this to be exported, this is my local
> > > workaround for the randconfig build bot.
> > > ---
> > >   arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c | 1 +
> > >   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c
> > > index ecbdff795f5e..beccbcfa7391 100644
> > > --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c
> > > +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c
> > > @@ -2864,6 +2864,7 @@ bool this_cpu_has_cap(unsigned int n)
> > >   	return false;
> > >   }
> > > +EXPORT_SYMBOL(this_cpu_has_cap);
> 
> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL? I think this_cpu_has_cap() is a bit more more
> specialised than cpus_have_const_cap().
> 
> With that:
> 
> Acked-by: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>

Yes, at this stage I think it's best for this to go via the Coresight tree.
So with the _GPL export:

Acked-by: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>

If that doesn't work for some reason, I can take it next week after the
initial arm64 queue has been merged. Please just let me know.

Will

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

Re: [PATCH] [RFC] arm64: export this_cpu_has_cap

[Suzuki K Poulose]

Hi Will

On 01/11/2021 09:01, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 29, 2021 at 07:06:23PM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote:
>> On Fri, Oct 29, 2021 at 02:31:23PM +0100, Suzuki K Poulose wrote:
>>> On 29/10/2021 12:30, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>>>> From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
>>>>
>>>> It's now used in a coresight driver that can be a loadable module:
>>>>
>>>> ERROR: modpost: "this_cpu_has_cap" [drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-trbe.ko] undefined!
>>>>
>>>> Fixes: 8a1065127d95 ("coresight: trbe: Add infrastructure for Errata handling")
>>>
>>> Reviewed-by: Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>
>>> Tested-by: Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>
>>>
>>> Will, Catalin, Mathieu,
>>>
>>> Do you have a preference on how this fix can be pulled in ? This may
>>> be safe to go via coresight tree if it is not too late. Otherwise,
>>> it could go via the arm64 tree.
>>
>> I think Will already closed/tagged the arm64 tree for the upcoming
>> merging window, though he could take it as a fix afterwards.
>>
>> If it doesn't conflict with the arm64 for-next/core, it's fine by me to
>> go through the coresight tree.
>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
>>>> ---
>>>> Not sure if we actually want this to be exported, this is my local
>>>> workaround for the randconfig build bot.
>>>> ---
>>>>    arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c | 1 +
>>>>    1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c
>>>> index ecbdff795f5e..beccbcfa7391 100644
>>>> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c
>>>> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c
>>>> @@ -2864,6 +2864,7 @@ bool this_cpu_has_cap(unsigned int n)
>>>>    	return false;
>>>>    }
>>>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(this_cpu_has_cap);
>>
>> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL? I think this_cpu_has_cap() is a bit more more
>> specialised than cpus_have_const_cap().
>>
>> With that:
>>
>> Acked-by: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
> 
> Yes, at this stage I think it's best for this to go via the Coresight tree.
> So with the _GPL export:
> 
> Acked-by: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
> 
> If that doesn't work for some reason, I can take it next week after the
> initial arm64 queue has been merged. Please just let me know.

As I understand correctly, this will now need to go via arm64 tree. The
CoreSight tree changes are pulled into Greg's tree and the next it will
happen is for the next release. Usually the fixes don't end up there
during the -rc cycles. So, I believe it is better if this goes via
arm64.

Suzuki

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

Re: [PATCH] [RFC] arm64: export this_cpu_has_cap

[Suzuki K Poulose]

Hi Will

On 01/11/2021 09:01, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 29, 2021 at 07:06:23PM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote:
>> On Fri, Oct 29, 2021 at 02:31:23PM +0100, Suzuki K Poulose wrote:
>>> On 29/10/2021 12:30, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>>>> From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
>>>>
>>>> It's now used in a coresight driver that can be a loadable module:
>>>>
>>>> ERROR: modpost: "this_cpu_has_cap" [drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-trbe.ko] undefined!
>>>>
>>>> Fixes: 8a1065127d95 ("coresight: trbe: Add infrastructure for Errata handling")
>>>
>>> Reviewed-by: Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>
>>> Tested-by: Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>
>>>
>>> Will, Catalin, Mathieu,
>>>
>>> Do you have a preference on how this fix can be pulled in ? This may
>>> be safe to go via coresight tree if it is not too late. Otherwise,
>>> it could go via the arm64 tree.
>>
>> I think Will already closed/tagged the arm64 tree for the upcoming
>> merging window, though he could take it as a fix afterwards.
>>
>> If it doesn't conflict with the arm64 for-next/core, it's fine by me to
>> go through the coresight tree.
>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
>>>> ---
>>>> Not sure if we actually want this to be exported, this is my local
>>>> workaround for the randconfig build bot.
>>>> ---
>>>>    arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c | 1 +
>>>>    1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c
>>>> index ecbdff795f5e..beccbcfa7391 100644
>>>> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c
>>>> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c
>>>> @@ -2864,6 +2864,7 @@ bool this_cpu_has_cap(unsigned int n)
>>>>    	return false;
>>>>    }
>>>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(this_cpu_has_cap);
>>
>> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL? I think this_cpu_has_cap() is a bit more more
>> specialised than cpus_have_const_cap().
>>
>> With that:
>>
>> Acked-by: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
> 
> Yes, at this stage I think it's best for this to go via the Coresight tree.
> So with the _GPL export:
> 
> Acked-by: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
> 
> If that doesn't work for some reason, I can take it next week after the
> initial arm64 queue has been merged. Please just let me know.

As I understand correctly, this will now need to go via arm64 tree. The
CoreSight tree changes are pulled into Greg's tree and the next it will
happen is for the next release. Usually the fixes don't end up there
during the -rc cycles. So, I believe it is better if this goes via
arm64.

Suzuki

Re: [PATCH] [RFC] arm64: export this_cpu_has_cap

[Will Deacon]

On Mon, Nov 01, 2021 at 09:34:08AM +0000, Suzuki K Poulose wrote:
> On 01/11/2021 09:01, Will Deacon wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 29, 2021 at 07:06:23PM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> > > On Fri, Oct 29, 2021 at 02:31:23PM +0100, Suzuki K Poulose wrote:
> > > > On 29/10/2021 12:30, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > > > > From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
> > > > > 
> > > > > It's now used in a coresight driver that can be a loadable module:
> > > > > 
> > > > > ERROR: modpost: "this_cpu_has_cap" [drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-trbe.ko] undefined!
> > > > > 
> > > > > Fixes: 8a1065127d95 ("coresight: trbe: Add infrastructure for Errata handling")
> > > > 
> > > > Reviewed-by: Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>
> > > > Tested-by: Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>
> > > > 
> > > > Will, Catalin, Mathieu,
> > > > 
> > > > Do you have a preference on how this fix can be pulled in ? This may
> > > > be safe to go via coresight tree if it is not too late. Otherwise,
> > > > it could go via the arm64 tree.
> > > 
> > > I think Will already closed/tagged the arm64 tree for the upcoming
> > > merging window, though he could take it as a fix afterwards.
> > > 
> > > If it doesn't conflict with the arm64 for-next/core, it's fine by me to
> > > go through the coresight tree.
> > > 
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
> > > > > ---
> > > > > Not sure if we actually want this to be exported, this is my local
> > > > > workaround for the randconfig build bot.
> > > > > ---
> > > > >    arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c | 1 +
> > > > >    1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> > > > > 
> > > > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c
> > > > > index ecbdff795f5e..beccbcfa7391 100644
> > > > > --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c
> > > > > +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c
> > > > > @@ -2864,6 +2864,7 @@ bool this_cpu_has_cap(unsigned int n)
> > > > >    	return false;
> > > > >    }
> > > > > +EXPORT_SYMBOL(this_cpu_has_cap);
> > > 
> > > EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL? I think this_cpu_has_cap() is a bit more more
> > > specialised than cpus_have_const_cap().
> > > 
> > > With that:
> > > 
> > > Acked-by: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
> > 
> > Yes, at this stage I think it's best for this to go via the Coresight tree.
> > So with the _GPL export:
> > 
> > Acked-by: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
> > 
> > If that doesn't work for some reason, I can take it next week after the
> > initial arm64 queue has been merged. Please just let me know.
> 
> As I understand correctly, this will now need to go via arm64 tree. The
> CoreSight tree changes are pulled into Greg's tree and the next it will
> happen is for the next release. Usually the fixes don't end up there
> during the -rc cycles. So, I believe it is better if this goes via
> arm64.

Hmm, are you saying that Coresight drivers don't receive fixes outside of
the merge window? That sounds sub-optimal...

But in any case, I'm happy to take this as long as it can wait until the
second half of the merge window.

Will

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

Re: [PATCH] [RFC] arm64: export this_cpu_has_cap

[Will Deacon]

On Mon, Nov 01, 2021 at 09:34:08AM +0000, Suzuki K Poulose wrote:
> On 01/11/2021 09:01, Will Deacon wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 29, 2021 at 07:06:23PM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> > > On Fri, Oct 29, 2021 at 02:31:23PM +0100, Suzuki K Poulose wrote:
> > > > On 29/10/2021 12:30, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > > > > From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
> > > > > 
> > > > > It's now used in a coresight driver that can be a loadable module:
> > > > > 
> > > > > ERROR: modpost: "this_cpu_has_cap" [drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-trbe.ko] undefined!
> > > > > 
> > > > > Fixes: 8a1065127d95 ("coresight: trbe: Add infrastructure for Errata handling")
> > > > 
> > > > Reviewed-by: Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>
> > > > Tested-by: Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>
> > > > 
> > > > Will, Catalin, Mathieu,
> > > > 
> > > > Do you have a preference on how this fix can be pulled in ? This may
> > > > be safe to go via coresight tree if it is not too late. Otherwise,
> > > > it could go via the arm64 tree.
> > > 
> > > I think Will already closed/tagged the arm64 tree for the upcoming
> > > merging window, though he could take it as a fix afterwards.
> > > 
> > > If it doesn't conflict with the arm64 for-next/core, it's fine by me to
> > > go through the coresight tree.
> > > 
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
> > > > > ---
> > > > > Not sure if we actually want this to be exported, this is my local
> > > > > workaround for the randconfig build bot.
> > > > > ---
> > > > >    arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c | 1 +
> > > > >    1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> > > > > 
> > > > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c
> > > > > index ecbdff795f5e..beccbcfa7391 100644
> > > > > --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c
> > > > > +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c
> > > > > @@ -2864,6 +2864,7 @@ bool this_cpu_has_cap(unsigned int n)
> > > > >    	return false;
> > > > >    }
> > > > > +EXPORT_SYMBOL(this_cpu_has_cap);
> > > 
> > > EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL? I think this_cpu_has_cap() is a bit more more
> > > specialised than cpus_have_const_cap().
> > > 
> > > With that:
> > > 
> > > Acked-by: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
> > 
> > Yes, at this stage I think it's best for this to go via the Coresight tree.
> > So with the _GPL export:
> > 
> > Acked-by: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
> > 
> > If that doesn't work for some reason, I can take it next week after the
> > initial arm64 queue has been merged. Please just let me know.
> 
> As I understand correctly, this will now need to go via arm64 tree. The
> CoreSight tree changes are pulled into Greg's tree and the next it will
> happen is for the next release. Usually the fixes don't end up there
> during the -rc cycles. So, I believe it is better if this goes via
> arm64.

Hmm, are you saying that Coresight drivers don't receive fixes outside of
the merge window? That sounds sub-optimal...

But in any case, I'm happy to take this as long as it can wait until the
second half of the merge window.

Will

Re: [PATCH] [RFC] arm64: export this_cpu_has_cap

[Suzuki K Poulose]

On 01/11/2021 09:40, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 01, 2021 at 09:34:08AM +0000, Suzuki K Poulose wrote:
>> On 01/11/2021 09:01, Will Deacon wrote:
>>> On Fri, Oct 29, 2021 at 07:06:23PM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote:
>>>> On Fri, Oct 29, 2021 at 02:31:23PM +0100, Suzuki K Poulose wrote:
>>>>> On 29/10/2021 12:30, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>>>>>> From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It's now used in a coresight driver that can be a loadable module:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ERROR: modpost: "this_cpu_has_cap" [drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-trbe.ko] undefined!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Fixes: 8a1065127d95 ("coresight: trbe: Add infrastructure for Errata handling")
>>>>>
>>>>> Reviewed-by: Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>
>>>>> Tested-by: Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>
>>>>>
>>>>> Will, Catalin, Mathieu,
>>>>>
>>>>> Do you have a preference on how this fix can be pulled in ? This may
>>>>> be safe to go via coresight tree if it is not too late. Otherwise,
>>>>> it could go via the arm64 tree.
>>>>
>>>> I think Will already closed/tagged the arm64 tree for the upcoming
>>>> merging window, though he could take it as a fix afterwards.
>>>>
>>>> If it doesn't conflict with the arm64 for-next/core, it's fine by me to
>>>> go through the coresight tree.
>>>>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>> Not sure if we actually want this to be exported, this is my local
>>>>>> workaround for the randconfig build bot.
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>     arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c | 1 +
>>>>>>     1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c
>>>>>> index ecbdff795f5e..beccbcfa7391 100644
>>>>>> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c
>>>>>> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c
>>>>>> @@ -2864,6 +2864,7 @@ bool this_cpu_has_cap(unsigned int n)
>>>>>>     	return false;
>>>>>>     }
>>>>>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(this_cpu_has_cap);
>>>>
>>>> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL? I think this_cpu_has_cap() is a bit more more
>>>> specialised than cpus_have_const_cap().
>>>>
>>>> With that:
>>>>
>>>> Acked-by: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
>>>
>>> Yes, at this stage I think it's best for this to go via the Coresight tree.
>>> So with the _GPL export:
>>>
>>> Acked-by: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
>>>
>>> If that doesn't work for some reason, I can take it next week after the
>>> initial arm64 queue has been merged. Please just let me know.
>>
>> As I understand correctly, this will now need to go via arm64 tree. The
>> CoreSight tree changes are pulled into Greg's tree and the next it will
>> happen is for the next release. Usually the fixes don't end up there
>> during the -rc cycles. So, I believe it is better if this goes via
>> arm64.
> 
> Hmm, are you saying that Coresight drivers don't receive fixes outside of
> the merge window? That sounds sub-optimal...

Unfortunately thats how it works today. We should fix this.

Mathieu, Greg,

Do you have any thoughts on how to address this ?

> 
> But in any case, I'm happy to take this as long as it can wait until the
> second half of the merge window.

Yes, please. Thats the quickest path to merging this patch.

Suzuki

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

Re: [PATCH] [RFC] arm64: export this_cpu_has_cap

[Suzuki K Poulose]

On 01/11/2021 09:40, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 01, 2021 at 09:34:08AM +0000, Suzuki K Poulose wrote:
>> On 01/11/2021 09:01, Will Deacon wrote:
>>> On Fri, Oct 29, 2021 at 07:06:23PM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote:
>>>> On Fri, Oct 29, 2021 at 02:31:23PM +0100, Suzuki K Poulose wrote:
>>>>> On 29/10/2021 12:30, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>>>>>> From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It's now used in a coresight driver that can be a loadable module:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ERROR: modpost: "this_cpu_has_cap" [drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-trbe.ko] undefined!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Fixes: 8a1065127d95 ("coresight: trbe: Add infrastructure for Errata handling")
>>>>>
>>>>> Reviewed-by: Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>
>>>>> Tested-by: Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>
>>>>>
>>>>> Will, Catalin, Mathieu,
>>>>>
>>>>> Do you have a preference on how this fix can be pulled in ? This may
>>>>> be safe to go via coresight tree if it is not too late. Otherwise,
>>>>> it could go via the arm64 tree.
>>>>
>>>> I think Will already closed/tagged the arm64 tree for the upcoming
>>>> merging window, though he could take it as a fix afterwards.
>>>>
>>>> If it doesn't conflict with the arm64 for-next/core, it's fine by me to
>>>> go through the coresight tree.
>>>>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>> Not sure if we actually want this to be exported, this is my local
>>>>>> workaround for the randconfig build bot.
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>     arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c | 1 +
>>>>>>     1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c
>>>>>> index ecbdff795f5e..beccbcfa7391 100644
>>>>>> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c
>>>>>> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c
>>>>>> @@ -2864,6 +2864,7 @@ bool this_cpu_has_cap(unsigned int n)
>>>>>>     	return false;
>>>>>>     }
>>>>>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(this_cpu_has_cap);
>>>>
>>>> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL? I think this_cpu_has_cap() is a bit more more
>>>> specialised than cpus_have_const_cap().
>>>>
>>>> With that:
>>>>
>>>> Acked-by: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
>>>
>>> Yes, at this stage I think it's best for this to go via the Coresight tree.
>>> So with the _GPL export:
>>>
>>> Acked-by: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
>>>
>>> If that doesn't work for some reason, I can take it next week after the
>>> initial arm64 queue has been merged. Please just let me know.
>>
>> As I understand correctly, this will now need to go via arm64 tree. The
>> CoreSight tree changes are pulled into Greg's tree and the next it will
>> happen is for the next release. Usually the fixes don't end up there
>> during the -rc cycles. So, I believe it is better if this goes via
>> arm64.
> 
> Hmm, are you saying that Coresight drivers don't receive fixes outside of
> the merge window? That sounds sub-optimal...

Unfortunately thats how it works today. We should fix this.

Mathieu, Greg,

Do you have any thoughts on how to address this ?

> 
> But in any case, I'm happy to take this as long as it can wait until the
> second half of the merge window.

Yes, please. Thats the quickest path to merging this patch.

Suzuki

Re: [PATCH] [RFC] arm64: export this_cpu_has_cap

[Greg Kroah-Hartman]

On Mon, Nov 01, 2021 at 09:52:22AM +0000, Suzuki K Poulose wrote:
> On 01/11/2021 09:40, Will Deacon wrote:
> > On Mon, Nov 01, 2021 at 09:34:08AM +0000, Suzuki K Poulose wrote:
> > > On 01/11/2021 09:01, Will Deacon wrote:
> > > > On Fri, Oct 29, 2021 at 07:06:23PM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> > > > > On Fri, Oct 29, 2021 at 02:31:23PM +0100, Suzuki K Poulose wrote:
> > > > > > On 29/10/2021 12:30, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > > > > > > From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > It's now used in a coresight driver that can be a loadable module:
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > ERROR: modpost: "this_cpu_has_cap" [drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-trbe.ko] undefined!
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > Fixes: 8a1065127d95 ("coresight: trbe: Add infrastructure for Errata handling")
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Reviewed-by: Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>
> > > > > > Tested-by: Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Will, Catalin, Mathieu,
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Do you have a preference on how this fix can be pulled in ? This may
> > > > > > be safe to go via coresight tree if it is not too late. Otherwise,
> > > > > > it could go via the arm64 tree.
> > > > > 
> > > > > I think Will already closed/tagged the arm64 tree for the upcoming
> > > > > merging window, though he could take it as a fix afterwards.
> > > > > 
> > > > > If it doesn't conflict with the arm64 for-next/core, it's fine by me to
> > > > > go through the coresight tree.
> > > > > 
> > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
> > > > > > > ---
> > > > > > > Not sure if we actually want this to be exported, this is my local
> > > > > > > workaround for the randconfig build bot.
> > > > > > > ---
> > > > > > >     arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c | 1 +
> > > > > > >     1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c
> > > > > > > index ecbdff795f5e..beccbcfa7391 100644
> > > > > > > --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c
> > > > > > > +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c
> > > > > > > @@ -2864,6 +2864,7 @@ bool this_cpu_has_cap(unsigned int n)
> > > > > > >     	return false;
> > > > > > >     }
> > > > > > > +EXPORT_SYMBOL(this_cpu_has_cap);
> > > > > 
> > > > > EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL? I think this_cpu_has_cap() is a bit more more
> > > > > specialised than cpus_have_const_cap().
> > > > > 
> > > > > With that:
> > > > > 
> > > > > Acked-by: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
> > > > 
> > > > Yes, at this stage I think it's best for this to go via the Coresight tree.
> > > > So with the _GPL export:
> > > > 
> > > > Acked-by: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
> > > > 
> > > > If that doesn't work for some reason, I can take it next week after the
> > > > initial arm64 queue has been merged. Please just let me know.
> > > 
> > > As I understand correctly, this will now need to go via arm64 tree. The
> > > CoreSight tree changes are pulled into Greg's tree and the next it will
> > > happen is for the next release. Usually the fixes don't end up there
> > > during the -rc cycles. So, I believe it is better if this goes via
> > > arm64.
> > 
> > Hmm, are you saying that Coresight drivers don't receive fixes outside of
> > the merge window? That sounds sub-optimal...
> 
> Unfortunately thats how it works today. We should fix this.
> 
> Mathieu, Greg,
> 
> Do you have any thoughts on how to address this ?

What?  That's crazy, if there are bugfixes needed of course I would take
them during the -rc cycle, that is explicitly what it is there for!

It's up to the maintainer of the subsystem to send me the fixes to get
into the -final kernel release, I don't pick them up on my own unless
asked to by them.

thanks,

greg k-h

Re: [PATCH] [RFC] arm64: export this_cpu_has_cap

[Greg Kroah-Hartman]

On Mon, Nov 01, 2021 at 09:52:22AM +0000, Suzuki K Poulose wrote:
> On 01/11/2021 09:40, Will Deacon wrote:
> > On Mon, Nov 01, 2021 at 09:34:08AM +0000, Suzuki K Poulose wrote:
> > > On 01/11/2021 09:01, Will Deacon wrote:
> > > > On Fri, Oct 29, 2021 at 07:06:23PM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> > > > > On Fri, Oct 29, 2021 at 02:31:23PM +0100, Suzuki K Poulose wrote:
> > > > > > On 29/10/2021 12:30, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > > > > > > From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > It's now used in a coresight driver that can be a loadable module:
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > ERROR: modpost: "this_cpu_has_cap" [drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-trbe.ko] undefined!
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > Fixes: 8a1065127d95 ("coresight: trbe: Add infrastructure for Errata handling")
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Reviewed-by: Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>
> > > > > > Tested-by: Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Will, Catalin, Mathieu,
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Do you have a preference on how this fix can be pulled in ? This may
> > > > > > be safe to go via coresight tree if it is not too late. Otherwise,
> > > > > > it could go via the arm64 tree.
> > > > > 
> > > > > I think Will already closed/tagged the arm64 tree for the upcoming
> > > > > merging window, though he could take it as a fix afterwards.
> > > > > 
> > > > > If it doesn't conflict with the arm64 for-next/core, it's fine by me to
> > > > > go through the coresight tree.
> > > > > 
> > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
> > > > > > > ---
> > > > > > > Not sure if we actually want this to be exported, this is my local
> > > > > > > workaround for the randconfig build bot.
> > > > > > > ---
> > > > > > >     arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c | 1 +
> > > > > > >     1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c
> > > > > > > index ecbdff795f5e..beccbcfa7391 100644
> > > > > > > --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c
> > > > > > > +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c
> > > > > > > @@ -2864,6 +2864,7 @@ bool this_cpu_has_cap(unsigned int n)
> > > > > > >     	return false;
> > > > > > >     }
> > > > > > > +EXPORT_SYMBOL(this_cpu_has_cap);
> > > > > 
> > > > > EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL? I think this_cpu_has_cap() is a bit more more
> > > > > specialised than cpus_have_const_cap().
> > > > > 
> > > > > With that:
> > > > > 
> > > > > Acked-by: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
> > > > 
> > > > Yes, at this stage I think it's best for this to go via the Coresight tree.
> > > > So with the _GPL export:
> > > > 
> > > > Acked-by: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
> > > > 
> > > > If that doesn't work for some reason, I can take it next week after the
> > > > initial arm64 queue has been merged. Please just let me know.
> > > 
> > > As I understand correctly, this will now need to go via arm64 tree. The
> > > CoreSight tree changes are pulled into Greg's tree and the next it will
> > > happen is for the next release. Usually the fixes don't end up there
> > > during the -rc cycles. So, I believe it is better if this goes via
> > > arm64.
> > 
> > Hmm, are you saying that Coresight drivers don't receive fixes outside of
> > the merge window? That sounds sub-optimal...
> 
> Unfortunately thats how it works today. We should fix this.
> 
> Mathieu, Greg,
> 
> Do you have any thoughts on how to address this ?

What?  That's crazy, if there are bugfixes needed of course I would take
them during the -rc cycle, that is explicitly what it is there for!

It's up to the maintainer of the subsystem to send me the fixes to get
into the -final kernel release, I don't pick them up on my own unless
asked to by them.

thanks,

greg k-h

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

Re: [PATCH] [RFC] arm64: export this_cpu_has_cap

[Mathieu Poirier]

On Mon, 1 Nov 2021 at 05:13, Greg Kroah-Hartman
<gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Nov 01, 2021 at 09:52:22AM +0000, Suzuki K Poulose wrote:
> > On 01/11/2021 09:40, Will Deacon wrote:
> > > On Mon, Nov 01, 2021 at 09:34:08AM +0000, Suzuki K Poulose wrote:
> > > > On 01/11/2021 09:01, Will Deacon wrote:
> > > > > On Fri, Oct 29, 2021 at 07:06:23PM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> > > > > > On Fri, Oct 29, 2021 at 02:31:23PM +0100, Suzuki K Poulose wrote:
> > > > > > > On 29/10/2021 12:30, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > > > > > > > From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > It's now used in a coresight driver that can be a loadable module:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > ERROR: modpost: "this_cpu_has_cap" [drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-trbe.ko] undefined!
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Fixes: 8a1065127d95 ("coresight: trbe: Add infrastructure for Errata handling")
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Reviewed-by: Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>
> > > > > > > Tested-by: Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Will, Catalin, Mathieu,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Do you have a preference on how this fix can be pulled in ? This may
> > > > > > > be safe to go via coresight tree if it is not too late. Otherwise,
> > > > > > > it could go via the arm64 tree.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I think Will already closed/tagged the arm64 tree for the upcoming
> > > > > > merging window, though he could take it as a fix afterwards.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > If it doesn't conflict with the arm64 for-next/core, it's fine by me to
> > > > > > go through the coresight tree.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
> > > > > > > > ---
> > > > > > > > Not sure if we actually want this to be exported, this is my local
> > > > > > > > workaround for the randconfig build bot.
> > > > > > > > ---
> > > > > > > >     arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c | 1 +
> > > > > > > >     1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c
> > > > > > > > index ecbdff795f5e..beccbcfa7391 100644
> > > > > > > > --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c
> > > > > > > > +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c
> > > > > > > > @@ -2864,6 +2864,7 @@ bool this_cpu_has_cap(unsigned int n)
> > > > > > > >           return false;
> > > > > > > >     }
> > > > > > > > +EXPORT_SYMBOL(this_cpu_has_cap);
> > > > > >
> > > > > > EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL? I think this_cpu_has_cap() is a bit more more
> > > > > > specialised than cpus_have_const_cap().
> > > > > >
> > > > > > With that:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Acked-by: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
> > > > >
> > > > > Yes, at this stage I think it's best for this to go via the Coresight tree.
> > > > > So with the _GPL export:
> > > > >
> > > > > Acked-by: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
> > > > >
> > > > > If that doesn't work for some reason, I can take it next week after the
> > > > > initial arm64 queue has been merged. Please just let me know.
> > > >
> > > > As I understand correctly, this will now need to go via arm64 tree. The
> > > > CoreSight tree changes are pulled into Greg's tree and the next it will
> > > > happen is for the next release. Usually the fixes don't end up there
> > > > during the -rc cycles. So, I believe it is better if this goes via
> > > > arm64.
> > >
> > > Hmm, are you saying that Coresight drivers don't receive fixes outside of
> > > the merge window? That sounds sub-optimal...
> >
> > Unfortunately thats how it works today. We should fix this.
> >
> > Mathieu, Greg,
> >
> > Do you have any thoughts on how to address this ?
>
> What?  That's crazy, if there are bugfixes needed of course I would take
> them during the -rc cycle, that is explicitly what it is there for!

I have sent patches to the char-misc tree several times during -rc
cycles.  As Greg points out, proceeding otherwise would not make
sense.

>
> It's up to the maintainer of the subsystem to send me the fixes to get
> into the -final kernel release, I don't pick them up on my own unless
> asked to by them.
>

I will send a pull request for this when I receive another patch with
Catalin's annotation and collected RB tags.

> thanks,
>
> greg k-h

Re: [PATCH] [RFC] arm64: export this_cpu_has_cap

[Mathieu Poirier]

On Mon, 1 Nov 2021 at 05:13, Greg Kroah-Hartman
<gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Nov 01, 2021 at 09:52:22AM +0000, Suzuki K Poulose wrote:
> > On 01/11/2021 09:40, Will Deacon wrote:
> > > On Mon, Nov 01, 2021 at 09:34:08AM +0000, Suzuki K Poulose wrote:
> > > > On 01/11/2021 09:01, Will Deacon wrote:
> > > > > On Fri, Oct 29, 2021 at 07:06:23PM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> > > > > > On Fri, Oct 29, 2021 at 02:31:23PM +0100, Suzuki K Poulose wrote:
> > > > > > > On 29/10/2021 12:30, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > > > > > > > From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > It's now used in a coresight driver that can be a loadable module:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > ERROR: modpost: "this_cpu_has_cap" [drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-trbe.ko] undefined!
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Fixes: 8a1065127d95 ("coresight: trbe: Add infrastructure for Errata handling")
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Reviewed-by: Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>
> > > > > > > Tested-by: Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Will, Catalin, Mathieu,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Do you have a preference on how this fix can be pulled in ? This may
> > > > > > > be safe to go via coresight tree if it is not too late. Otherwise,
> > > > > > > it could go via the arm64 tree.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I think Will already closed/tagged the arm64 tree for the upcoming
> > > > > > merging window, though he could take it as a fix afterwards.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > If it doesn't conflict with the arm64 for-next/core, it's fine by me to
> > > > > > go through the coresight tree.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
> > > > > > > > ---
> > > > > > > > Not sure if we actually want this to be exported, this is my local
> > > > > > > > workaround for the randconfig build bot.
> > > > > > > > ---
> > > > > > > >     arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c | 1 +
> > > > > > > >     1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c
> > > > > > > > index ecbdff795f5e..beccbcfa7391 100644
> > > > > > > > --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c
> > > > > > > > +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c
> > > > > > > > @@ -2864,6 +2864,7 @@ bool this_cpu_has_cap(unsigned int n)
> > > > > > > >           return false;
> > > > > > > >     }
> > > > > > > > +EXPORT_SYMBOL(this_cpu_has_cap);
> > > > > >
> > > > > > EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL? I think this_cpu_has_cap() is a bit more more
> > > > > > specialised than cpus_have_const_cap().
> > > > > >
> > > > > > With that:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Acked-by: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
> > > > >
> > > > > Yes, at this stage I think it's best for this to go via the Coresight tree.
> > > > > So with the _GPL export:
> > > > >
> > > > > Acked-by: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
> > > > >
> > > > > If that doesn't work for some reason, I can take it next week after the
> > > > > initial arm64 queue has been merged. Please just let me know.
> > > >
> > > > As I understand correctly, this will now need to go via arm64 tree. The
> > > > CoreSight tree changes are pulled into Greg's tree and the next it will
> > > > happen is for the next release. Usually the fixes don't end up there
> > > > during the -rc cycles. So, I believe it is better if this goes via
> > > > arm64.
> > >
> > > Hmm, are you saying that Coresight drivers don't receive fixes outside of
> > > the merge window? That sounds sub-optimal...
> >
> > Unfortunately thats how it works today. We should fix this.
> >
> > Mathieu, Greg,
> >
> > Do you have any thoughts on how to address this ?
>
> What?  That's crazy, if there are bugfixes needed of course I would take
> them during the -rc cycle, that is explicitly what it is there for!

I have sent patches to the char-misc tree several times during -rc
cycles.  As Greg points out, proceeding otherwise would not make
sense.

>
> It's up to the maintainer of the subsystem to send me the fixes to get
> into the -final kernel release, I don't pick them up on my own unless
> asked to by them.
>

I will send a pull request for this when I receive another patch with
Catalin's annotation and collected RB tags.

> thanks,
>
> greg k-h

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

Re: [PATCH] [RFC] arm64: export this_cpu_has_cap

[Suzuki K Poulose]

Arnd


On 29/10/2021 19:06, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 29, 2021 at 02:31:23PM +0100, Suzuki K Poulose wrote:
>> On 29/10/2021 12:30, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>>> From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
>>>
>>> It's now used in a coresight driver that can be a loadable module:
>>>
>>> ERROR: modpost: "this_cpu_has_cap" [drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-trbe.ko] undefined!
>>>
>>> Fixes: 8a1065127d95 ("coresight: trbe: Add infrastructure for Errata handling")
>>
>> Reviewed-by: Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>
>> Tested-by: Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>
>>
>> Will, Catalin, Mathieu,
>>
>> Do you have a preference on how this fix can be pulled in ? This may
>> be safe to go via coresight tree if it is not too late. Otherwise,
>> it could go via the arm64 tree.
> 
> I think Will already closed/tagged the arm64 tree for the upcoming
> merging window, though he could take it as a fix afterwards.
> 
> If it doesn't conflict with the arm64 for-next/core, it's fine by me to
> go through the coresight tree.
> 
>>> Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
>>> ---
>>> Not sure if we actually want this to be exported, this is my local
>>> workaround for the randconfig build bot.
>>> ---
>>>    arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c | 1 +
>>>    1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c
>>> index ecbdff795f5e..beccbcfa7391 100644
>>> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c
>>> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c
>>> @@ -2864,6 +2864,7 @@ bool this_cpu_has_cap(unsigned int n)
>>>    	return false;
>>>    }
>>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(this_cpu_has_cap);
> 
> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL? I think this_cpu_has_cap() is a bit more more
> specialised than cpus_have_const_cap().
> 
> With that:
> 
> Acked-by: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
> 

Do you plan to send an updated patch with above ?

Suzuki

Re: [PATCH] [RFC] arm64: export this_cpu_has_cap

[Suzuki K Poulose]

Arnd


On 29/10/2021 19:06, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 29, 2021 at 02:31:23PM +0100, Suzuki K Poulose wrote:
>> On 29/10/2021 12:30, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>>> From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
>>>
>>> It's now used in a coresight driver that can be a loadable module:
>>>
>>> ERROR: modpost: "this_cpu_has_cap" [drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-trbe.ko] undefined!
>>>
>>> Fixes: 8a1065127d95 ("coresight: trbe: Add infrastructure for Errata handling")
>>
>> Reviewed-by: Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>
>> Tested-by: Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>
>>
>> Will, Catalin, Mathieu,
>>
>> Do you have a preference on how this fix can be pulled in ? This may
>> be safe to go via coresight tree if it is not too late. Otherwise,
>> it could go via the arm64 tree.
> 
> I think Will already closed/tagged the arm64 tree for the upcoming
> merging window, though he could take it as a fix afterwards.
> 
> If it doesn't conflict with the arm64 for-next/core, it's fine by me to
> go through the coresight tree.
> 
>>> Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
>>> ---
>>> Not sure if we actually want this to be exported, this is my local
>>> workaround for the randconfig build bot.
>>> ---
>>>    arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c | 1 +
>>>    1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c
>>> index ecbdff795f5e..beccbcfa7391 100644
>>> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c
>>> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c
>>> @@ -2864,6 +2864,7 @@ bool this_cpu_has_cap(unsigned int n)
>>>    	return false;
>>>    }
>>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(this_cpu_has_cap);
> 
> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL? I think this_cpu_has_cap() is a bit more more
> specialised than cpus_have_const_cap().
> 
> With that:
> 
> Acked-by: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
> 

Do you plan to send an updated patch with above ?

Suzuki



_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel