Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Message-ID: <32803e0b-8ff6-ae8d-f9cb-ce2d3fd37229@intel.com>
Date:   Thu, 5 May 2022 16:35:39 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/91.8.1
Subject: Re: Issue With real-time patches on 5.15.y
Content-Language: en-US
To:     Joseph Salisbury <joseph.salisbury@canonical.com>,
        tglx@linutronix.de
Cc:     linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, dave.hansen@linux.intel.com,
        linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org
References: <bdb23fe5-51ae-8873-a3d7-85f377877c79@canonical.com>
From:   Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>
In-Reply-To: <bdb23fe5-51ae-8873-a3d7-85f377877c79@canonical.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Precedence: bulk

On 5/5/22 16:18, Joseph Salisbury wrote:
> The real-time kernel build failure can be resolved by reverting commit
> b50854eca0e0.  The failure seems to be due to the removal of an include
> of xstate.h from pkru.h and caused spinlock_t to not be defined.  The
> commit would only be reverted for the real-time kernel and not any other
> kernels.  I wanted to see if reverting the commit is the proper
> approach, or if cherry-picking additional commits might be a better
> solution in preparation for additional changes that might be coming in
> the future?
> 
> Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.

I thought you distro folks were the franenkernel experts. :)

But, seriously...  This isn't rocket science.  Just look at the pkru.h
in your tree and figure out what includes it needs.  If it needs FPU
gunk, include the FPU header.  If you get a compile error for spinlock_t
...  well ...  find the code using spinlock_t and make sure it includes
spinlock.h.