Hello RT-list!
I'm pleased to announce the 6.6.12-rt20 stable release.
You can get this release via the git tree at:
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/rt/linux-stable-rt.git
branch: v6.6-rt
Head SHA1: cb00e5b8a8dfcf05048010551082c960b0eef099
Or to build 6.6.12-rt20 directly, the following patches should be applied:
https://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v6.x/linux-6.6.tar.xz
https://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v6.x/patch-6.6.12.xz
https://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/projects/rt/6.6/patch-6.6.12-rt20.patch.xz
Enjoy!
Clark
On 2024-01-18 20:59:45 [-0000], Clark Williams wrote:
> Hello RT-list!
Hi Clark,
> I'm pleased to announce the 6.6.12-rt20 stable release.
I've been looking over it and it looks okay. Then I compared how it
would do it vs your outcome and noticed this:
--- a/arch/riscv/kernel/cpufeature.c
+++ b/arch/riscv/kernel/cpufeature.c
@@ -575,12 +575,6 @@ static int check_unaligned_access(void *param)
if (per_cpu(misaligned_access_speed, cpu) != RISCV_HWPROBE_MISALIGNED_UNKNOWN)
return;
- page = alloc_pages(GFP_NOWAIT, get_order(MISALIGNED_BUFFER_SIZE));
- if (!page) {
- pr_warn("Can't alloc pages to measure memcpy performance");
- return;
- }
-
/* Make an unaligned destination buffer. */
dst = (void *)((unsigned long)page_address(page) | 0x1);
/* Unalign src as well, but differently (off by 1 + 2 = 3). */
You shouldn't allocate that page. Nobody will free it, that page is
passed via an argument now. Please drop hunk.
While at it, do you think you can drop patch
preempt-Put-preempt_enable-within-an-instrumentation.patch
or revert commit
c15abad8f7159 ("preempt: Put preempt_enable() within an instrumentation*() section.")
I've been looking over it and it is fixed as of v6.6 so this patch is no
longer needed.
> Enjoy!
> Clark
Sebastian
I'll revert that commit and re-release the 6.6.14 I just pushed
On Wed, Jan 24, 2024 at 9:48 AM Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On 2024-01-18 20:59:45 [-0000], Clark Williams wrote:
> > Hello RT-list!
> Hi Clark,
>
> > I'm pleased to announce the 6.6.12-rt20 stable release.
>
> I've been looking over it and it looks okay. Then I compared how it
> would do it vs your outcome and noticed this:
>
> --- a/arch/riscv/kernel/cpufeature.c
> +++ b/arch/riscv/kernel/cpufeature.c
> @@ -575,12 +575,6 @@ static int check_unaligned_access(void *param)
> if (per_cpu(misaligned_access_speed, cpu) != RISCV_HWPROBE_MISALIGNED_UNKNOWN)
> return;
>
> - page = alloc_pages(GFP_NOWAIT, get_order(MISALIGNED_BUFFER_SIZE));
> - if (!page) {
> - pr_warn("Can't alloc pages to measure memcpy performance");
> - return;
> - }
> -
> /* Make an unaligned destination buffer. */
> dst = (void *)((unsigned long)page_address(page) | 0x1);
> /* Unalign src as well, but differently (off by 1 + 2 = 3). */
>
> You shouldn't allocate that page. Nobody will free it, that page is
> passed via an argument now. Please drop hunk.
>
> While at it, do you think you can drop patch
> preempt-Put-preempt_enable-within-an-instrumentation.patch
>
> or revert commit
> c15abad8f7159 ("preempt: Put preempt_enable() within an instrumentation*() section.")
>
> I've been looking over it and it is fixed as of v6.6 so this patch is no
> longer needed.
>
> > Enjoy!
> > Clark
>
> Sebastian
>
To be clear, I'll drop the referenced hunk from the RISC-V commit and
revert c15abad8f7159
On Wed, Jan 31, 2024 at 10:04 PM Clark Williams <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> I'll revert that commit and re-release the 6.6.14 I just pushed
>
> On Wed, Jan 24, 2024 at 9:48 AM Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > On 2024-01-18 20:59:45 [-0000], Clark Williams wrote:
> > > Hello RT-list!
> > Hi Clark,
> >
> > > I'm pleased to announce the 6.6.12-rt20 stable release.
> >
> > I've been looking over it and it looks okay. Then I compared how it
> > would do it vs your outcome and noticed this:
> >
> > --- a/arch/riscv/kernel/cpufeature.c
> > +++ b/arch/riscv/kernel/cpufeature.c
> > @@ -575,12 +575,6 @@ static int check_unaligned_access(void *param)
> > if (per_cpu(misaligned_access_speed, cpu) != RISCV_HWPROBE_MISALIGNED_UNKNOWN)
> > return;
> >
> > - page = alloc_pages(GFP_NOWAIT, get_order(MISALIGNED_BUFFER_SIZE));
> > - if (!page) {
> > - pr_warn("Can't alloc pages to measure memcpy performance");
> > - return;
> > - }
> > -
> > /* Make an unaligned destination buffer. */
> > dst = (void *)((unsigned long)page_address(page) | 0x1);
> > /* Unalign src as well, but differently (off by 1 + 2 = 3). */
> >
> > You shouldn't allocate that page. Nobody will free it, that page is
> > passed via an argument now. Please drop hunk.
> >
> > While at it, do you think you can drop patch
> > preempt-Put-preempt_enable-within-an-instrumentation.patch
> >
> > or revert commit
> > c15abad8f7159 ("preempt: Put preempt_enable() within an instrumentation*() section.")
> >
> > I've been looking over it and it is fixed as of v6.6 so this patch is no
> > longer needed.
> >
> > > Enjoy!
> > > Clark
> >
> > Sebastian
> >