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=-5.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no 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 EA825C433DB for ; Thu, 4 Mar 2021 13:51:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B7BD264F41 for ; Thu, 4 Mar 2021 13:51:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S241494AbhCDNvP (ORCPT ); Thu, 4 Mar 2021 08:51:15 -0500 Received: from wout1-smtp.messagingengine.com ([64.147.123.24]:46849 "EHLO wout1-smtp.messagingengine.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S241597AbhCDNvB (ORCPT ); Thu, 4 Mar 2021 08:51:01 -0500 Received: from compute2.internal (compute2.nyi.internal [10.202.2.42]) by mailout.west.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 152EF1434; Thu, 4 Mar 2021 08:49:56 -0500 (EST) Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute2.internal (MEProxy); Thu, 04 Mar 2021 08:49:56 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kroah.com; h= date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:in-reply-to; s=fm3; bh=6cQZ873v7AbTfsWamdQwEC0EwcY A4zd+ouupYsm63p8=; b=iZMv3wt2Gx4P57OApxtufdqa4zfrOJxjLTRSzdFZY1B XiyHrAk/8sRPUl+PQfEo3ivaLPgEfr5Wcev+uE6uROBfGKRgUDB3qD7wGAnCvr7w gm0jVjiC6RamEBFhVEQtOjo9riwXaVvHndkAEhDP2HjzwuTDtJxFlyRLw2OSwarf vRGEhtpsI/m+1qw/wspzzFemf0XLlICwPVKv0lbznCtYlg73ednSTPoWlGuF8QPe 52Q1wFxMauIrj1oXuHKB/i8tu7jO89u+uXa5pVCmjrV693AFt4Il9IV/0+wKQCPj SY1WSmrmsWwdBG6zBL6mhJXsehE4/rnXPRgVNGU+eeg== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-proxy :x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=6cQZ87 3v7AbTfsWamdQwEC0EwcYA4zd+ouupYsm63p8=; b=qpWK6my0EZQlmy5++QCZyv DjImLTDncSWJVPVqeh7gbBwDtSLfMtX0H3pfnPxdv6x3lEnV+ImFW9mdtfbPfV28 KOLDsWWtEQZnbL0ScpUWFjgKkXL8pBwoITtHU3Wt/mpiXiGE85H/VH32A+YzRPV+ vHjbnOMaOYJ6bthtk2ATC9wxllxbnjkd/lEDPQe98uMfjdVf1ZFMcAqrtX6fdpCS ZdKM6D3mEE2A2LxxCW3Q9qnLMVOUDN4VsvgUGbnLSlD3S/2NNrZh6Hj3qdhhu8aX 9XwArCB6BjsI4z83P27XvBLUNM4PwUUYdehWLHZgofiTb2vlsp+SlTVYDx/UNR4Q == X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeduledruddtgedghedvucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucenucfjughrpeffhffvuffkfhggtggujgesthdtre dttddtvdenucfhrhhomhepifhrvghgucfmjfcuoehgrhgvgheskhhrohgrhhdrtghomheq necuggftrfgrthhtvghrnhepveeuheejgfffgfeivddukedvkedtleelleeghfeljeeiue eggeevueduudekvdetnecukfhppeekfedrkeeirdejgedrieegnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfu ihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepghhrvghgsehkrhhorghhrdgtoh hm X-ME-Proxy: Received: from localhost (83-86-74-64.cable.dynamic.v4.ziggo.nl [83.86.74.64]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 23CE51080057; Thu, 4 Mar 2021 08:49:55 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 4 Mar 2021 14:49:53 +0100 From: Greg KH To: Ben Hutchings Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [stable 4.9-4.19] Fix arm64 build regression in xen-netback Message-ID: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: stable@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Mar 01, 2021 at 08:56:07PM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote: > The arm64 implementations of some atomic operations had incorrect > assembly constraints. Depending on the compiler version and > options, this can result in a build failure for some parameter > values: > > /tmp/ccDOb5nB.s: Assembler messages: > /tmp/ccDOb5nB.s:2214: Error: immediate out of range at operand 3 -- `bic w1,w0,5' > > This has specifically been seen when building a 4.9 stable kernel with > gcc 6.3.0, since commit 23025393dbeb "xen/netback: use lateeoi irq > binding" was applied. I can also reproduce it with 4.14. > > I cannot reproduce it with 4.19, but the same fixes are applicable and > the issue presumably could occur when using different compiler > options. > > I haven't done anything about the 4.4 branch since it does not have > that xen-netback fix and it has significantly different definitions > for arm64 atomic ops. > > I've attached a mailbox of patches for each of the 4.9, 4.14, and 4.19 > branches. All now queued up, thanks. greg k-h