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 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C8471C433EF for ; Wed, 1 Jun 2022 16:01:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S244642AbiFAQBi (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Jun 2022 12:01:38 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:48488 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S237532AbiFAQBh (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Jun 2022 12:01:37 -0400 Received: from dfw.source.kernel.org (dfw.source.kernel.org [IPv6:2604:1380:4641:c500::1]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F2ED6A309C; Wed, 1 Jun 2022 09:01:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp.kernel.org (relay.kernel.org [52.25.139.140]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by dfw.source.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9002361374; Wed, 1 Jun 2022 16:01:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D86AFC341C0; Wed, 1 Jun 2022 16:01:34 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1654099294; bh=oA+EUqddOP9mSF3/WqgqRAd5IBzHc7jbgAQPJ2l2RH4=; h=References:In-Reply-To:From:Date:Subject:To:Cc:From; b=QaqrFaTf/odCGUm27lt5npWIE7gB1Xw7LWPnb8j7jaI/VFxMWGl/mYi8lnzQHTCp/ vnsI9Z6JQtQ4dtIJrmwrNPjXOHFKSFoCdOIO8mowwPiLwHe/TZ/VYUnE/A2bi7GLNZ oXgycfVfzqv4swm+rb9bgW0YUlEk/lgGUqyYhilg/bgAJ03WZCG8tub22FZFZA+KxU jEchBXNDKDkU1RxGZqp/v8MmYhEaD2tP+lQbjcv9kjfkgmUNo1jhmhUZ1oMKuGtlfD 16LevERUy1nEMw2XrLzOAv7SFiVWF+QznrHJO62PlZenU8orLZLDx6Xk4ZLy4EQMQX iGbynwcxiPfhQ== Received: by mail-oi1-f181.google.com with SMTP id w130so3283283oig.0; Wed, 01 Jun 2022 09:01:34 -0700 (PDT) X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531yQW51zcs2xK/j66B7Dj0Vsy/awZmjuWFkoFCyxxdK04bAmFxp K0SxLNGiH20XBE9BgXQp2N5pYM7tQ0FLeRnRdUk= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzYXHkct04PqnXR7IbV4sXZEq1LtbCs2723oYWisXmZd95HwrBLMIM/nzioeRjFTUQZo298T5EkZLhn/JA3SzA= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6808:300e:b0:32c:425e:df34 with SMTP id ay14-20020a056808300e00b0032c425edf34mr84856oib.126.1654099293834; Wed, 01 Jun 2022 09:01:33 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <358025d1-28e6-708b-d23d-3f22ae12a800@xen0n.name> <832c3ae8-6c68-db2c-2c7f-0a5cd3071543@xen0n.name> In-Reply-To: From: Ard Biesheuvel Date: Wed, 1 Jun 2022 18:01:22 +0200 X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: Message-ID: Subject: Re: [musl] Re: [GIT PULL] asm-generic changes for 5.19 To: Arnd Bergmann Cc: WANG Xuerui , Huacai Chen , linux-arch , GNU C Library , Yoshinori Sato , Peter Zijlstra , Marc Zyngier , Masahiro Yamada , musl@lists.openwall.com, Linux Kernel Mailing List , Jiaxun Yang , ACPI Devel Maling List , Jianmin Lv , linux-pci , Linus Torvalds , Huacai Chen Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-pci@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 1 Jun 2022 at 09:41, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > On Wed, Jun 1, 2022 at 7:52 AM WANG Xuerui wrote: > > On 6/1/22 00:01, Huacai Chen wrote: > > > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/chenhuacai/linux-loongson.git/log/?h=loongarch-next > > > has been updated. Now this branch droped irqchip drivers and pci > > > drivers. But the existing irqchip drivers need some small adjustment > > > to avoid build errors [1], and I hope Marc can give an Acked-by. > > > Thanks. > > > > > > This branch can be built with defconfig and allmodconfig (except > > > drivers/platform/surface/aggregator/controller.c, because it requires > > > 8bit/16bit cmpxchg, which I was told to remove their support). > > > > > > [1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/e7cf33a170d0b4e98e53744f60dbf922@kernel.org/T/#t > > > > I see the loongarch-next HEAD has been updated and it's now purely arch > > changes aside from the two trivial irqchip cleanups. Some other changes > > to the v11 patchset [1] are included, but arguably minor enough to not > > invalidate previous Reviewed-by tags. > > Very nice! I don't see exactly how the previous build bugs were addressed, > but I can confirm that this version builds. Regarding the two irqchip patches, > 621e7015b529 ("irqchip/loongson-liointc: Fix build error for LoongArch") is > a good way to work around the mips oddity, and I have no problem taking > that through the asm-generic tree. The other one, f54b4a166023 ("irqchip: > Adjust Kconfig for Loongson"), looks mostly unnecessary, and I think only > the LOONGSON_HTPIC change should be included here, while I would > leave out the COMPILE_TEST changes and instead have the driver > changes take care of making it possible to keep building it on x86, possibly > doing > > depends on MACH_LOONGSON64 || (COMPILE_TEST && ACPI) > > in the future, after the loongarch64 ACPI support is merged. > > > After some small tweaks: > > > > - adding "#include " to arch/loongarch/include/asm/ptrace.h, > > - adding an arch/loongarch/include/uapi/asm/bpf_perf_event.h with the > > same content as arch/arm64's, and > > - adding "depends on ARM64 || X86" to > > drivers/platform/surface/aggregator/Kconfig, > > > > the current loongarch-next HEAD (commit > > 36552a24f70d21b7d63d9ef490561dbdc13798d7) now passes allmodconfig build > > (with CONFIG_WERROR disabled; my Gentoo-flavored gcc-12 seems to emit > > warnings on a few drivers). > > The only one of these issues that I see is the surface aggregator one. > I think we can address all three as follow-up fixes after -rc1 if the port > gets merged and these are still required. > > > The majority of userspace ABI has been stable for a few months already, > > after the addition of orig_a0 and removal of newfstatat; the necessary > > changes to switch to statx are already reviewed [2] / merged [3], and > > have been integrated into the LoongArch port of Gentoo for a while. Eric > > looked at the v11 and gave comments, and changes were made according to > > the suggestions, but it'd probably better to get a proper Reviewed-by. > > Right. > > > Among the rest of patches, I think maybe the EFI/boot protocol part > > still need approval/ack from the EFI maintainer. However because the > > current port isn't going to be able to run on any real hardware, maybe > > that part could be done later; I'm not sure if the unacknowledged EFI > > bits should be removed as well. > > Ard, do you have any last comments on this? > It would be nice if the questions I raised against the previous revision (v11) were addressed (or at least answered) first. In general, I think this is feeling a bit rushed and IMHO we should probably defer this to the next cycle.