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;
From:   Jiexun Wang <wangjiexun@tinylab.org>
To:     samuel@sholland.org
Cc:     aou@eecs.berkeley.edu, conor@kernel.org, falcon@tinylab.org,
        guoren@kernel.org, jszhang@kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org,
        palmer@dabbelt.com, paul.walmsley@sifive.com, tglx@linutronix.de,
        wangjiexun@tinylab.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] RISC-V: Fix use of non existent CONFIG_HAVE_SOFTIRQ_ON_OWN_STACK
Date:   Sun, 10 Sep 2023 08:16:01 +0800
Message-Id: <20230910001601.371826-1-wangjiexun@tinylab.org>
In-Reply-To: <0e270067-cd2d-ecd0-512b-5dce4865fa4c@sholland.org>
References: <0e270067-cd2d-ecd0-512b-5dce4865fa4c@sholland.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Feedback-ID: bizesmtp:tinylab.org:qybglogicsvrgz:qybglogicsvrgz5a-0
Precedence: bulk

On Sat, 9 Sep 2023 16:20:41 -0500, Samuel Holland wrote:=0D
>Hi,=0D
>=0D
>The patch is correct, though the subject isn't quite accurate.=0D
>CONFIG_HAVE_SOFTIRQ_ON_OWN_STACK exists; it is defined in arch/Kconfig.=0D
>It's just the wrong option to use to guard the function definition.=0D
>=0D
=0D
I think I should send a new version of the patch with the subject:=0D
RISC-V: Fix wrong use of CONFIG_HAVE_SOFTIRQ_ON_OWN_STACK. =0D
Does this subject look more appropriate?=0D
=0D
>On 9/6/23 07:32, Jiexun Wang wrote:=0D
>> If configuration options SOFTIRQ_ON_OWN_STACK and PREEMPT_RT =0D
>> are enabled simultaneously under RISC-V architecture,=0D
>> it will result in a compilation failure:=0D
>> =0D
>> arch/riscv/kernel/irq.c:64:6: error: redefinition of 'do_softirq_own_sta=
ck'=0D
>>    64 | void do_softirq_own_stack(void)=0D
>>       |      ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~=0D
>> In file included from ./arch/riscv/include/generated/asm/softirq_stack.h=
:1,=0D
>>                  from arch/riscv/kernel/irq.c:15:=0D
>> ./include/asm-generic/softirq_stack.h:8:20: note: previous definition of=
 'do_softirq_own_stack' was here=0D
>>     8 | static inline void do_softirq_own_stack(void)=0D
>>       |                    ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~=0D
>>       =0D
>> After changing CONFIG_HAVE_SOFTIRQ_ON_OWN_STACK to CONFIG_SOFTIRQ_ON_OWN=
_STACK,=0D
>> compilation can be successful.=0D
>> =0D
>> Fixes: dd69d07a5a6c ("riscv: stack: Support HAVE_SOFTIRQ_ON_OWN_STACK")=
=0D
>> Signed-off-by: Jiexun Wang <wangjiexun@tinylab.org>=0D
>> ---=0D
>> Changes in v2:=0D
>> - changed to a more suitable subject line=0D
>> - add a Fixes tag=0D
>> =0D
>> ---=0D
>>  arch/riscv/kernel/irq.c | 2 +-=0D
>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)=0D
>> =0D
>> diff --git a/arch/riscv/kernel/irq.c b/arch/riscv/kernel/irq.c=0D
>> index a8efa053c4a5..a86f272ae2c3 100644=0D
>> --- a/arch/riscv/kernel/irq.c=0D
>> +++ b/arch/riscv/kernel/irq.c=0D
>> @@ -60,7 +60,7 @@ static void init_irq_stacks(void)=0D
>>  }=0D
>>  #endif /* CONFIG_VMAP_STACK */=0D
>>  =0D
>> -#ifdef CONFIG_HAVE_SOFTIRQ_ON_OWN_STACK=0D
>> +#ifdef CONFIG_SOFTIRQ_ON_OWN_STACK=0D
>=0D
>It would be good to fix the #endif comment at the bottom of the function=0D
>as well.=0D
=0D
Thanks, I will fix this as well.=0D
=0D
Best regards,=0D
Jiexun Wang=0D
=0D
>=0D
>Regards,=0D
>Samuel=0D
>=0D
>>  void do_softirq_own_stack(void)=0D
>>  {=0D