Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-47231-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 147.75.80.249 as permitted sender) client-ip=147.75.80.249;
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <170561158585.591793.15929255265114320850@demetrius>
 <20240124094843.K-b1_mn7@linutronix.de> <CAMLffL8qyNCocBGtxfDO49dORs_QFdv-6ZrvBEbhxjoBBk4rrw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAMLffL8qyNCocBGtxfDO49dORs_QFdv-6ZrvBEbhxjoBBk4rrw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Clark Williams <williams@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2024 22:05:26 +0000
Message-ID: <CAMLffL9fVw4M7b4cnQdy7KwHJGQNyiM6SvR-3zHkGKrkzV3mEw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCE] 6.6.12-rt20
To: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, 
	linux-rt-users <linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org>, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>, 
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>, Carsten Emde <C.Emde@osadl.org>, John Kacur <jkacur@redhat.com>, 
	Daniel Wagner <daniel.wagner@suse.com>, Tom Zanussi <tom.zanussi@linux.intel.com>, 
	Pavel Machek <pavel@denx.de>, Joseph Salisbury <joseph.salisbury@canonical.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

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=E2=80=AFPM Clark Williams <williams@redhat.co=
m> wrote:
>
> I'll revert that commit and re-release the 6.6.14 I just pushed
>
> On Wed, Jan 24, 2024 at 9:48=E2=80=AFAM Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
> <bigeasy@linutronix.de> 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) !=3D RISCV_HWPROBE_MI=
SALIGNED_UNKNOWN)
> >                 return;
> >
> > -       page =3D alloc_pages(GFP_NOWAIT, get_order(MISALIGNED_BUFFER_SI=
ZE));
> > -       if (!page) {
> > -               pr_warn("Can't alloc pages to measure memcpy performanc=
e");
> > -               return;
> > -       }
> > -
> >         /* Make an unaligned destination buffer. */
> >         dst =3D (void *)((unsigned long)page_address(page) | 0x1);
> >         /* Unalign src as well, but differently (off by 1 + 2 =3D 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 instrumentat=
ion*() section.")
> >
> > I've been looking over it and it is fixed as of v6.6 so this patch is n=
o
> > longer needed.
> >
> > > Enjoy!
> > > Clark
> >
> > Sebastian
> >