* linux-next: manual merge of the tip tree with the loongarch tree
@ 2025-03-03 3:50 Stephen Rothwell
2025-04-01 4:42 ` Stephen Rothwell
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Stephen Rothwell @ 2025-03-03 3:50 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Thomas Gleixner, Ingo Molnar, H. Peter Anvin, Peter Zijlstra,
Huacai Chen
Cc: Huacai Chen, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Linux Next Mailing List,
Nam Cao, Thomas Weißschuh, Wentao Guan, Yuli Wang
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1280 bytes --]
Hi all,
Today's linux-next merge of the tip tree got a conflict in:
arch/loongarch/Kconfig
between commit:
30051fca4509 ("LoongArch: Enable UBSAN (Undefined Behavior Sanitizer)")
from the loongarch tree and commit:
d2862bb9d9ca ("LoongArch: vDSO: Switch to generic storage implementation")
from the tip tree.
I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary. This
is now fixed as far as linux-next is concerned, but any non trivial
conflicts should be mentioned to your upstream maintainer when your tree
is submitted for merging. You may also want to consider cooperating
with the maintainer of the conflicting tree to minimise any particularly
complex conflicts.
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell
diff --cc arch/loongarch/Kconfig
index 0043d5d4b5ea,d7ddf2a43e63..000000000000
--- a/arch/loongarch/Kconfig
+++ b/arch/loongarch/Kconfig
@@@ -30,7 -30,7 +30,8 @@@ config LOONGARC
select ARCH_HAS_SET_MEMORY
select ARCH_HAS_SET_DIRECT_MAP
select ARCH_HAS_TICK_BROADCAST if GENERIC_CLOCKEVENTS_BROADCAST
+ select ARCH_HAS_UBSAN
+ select ARCH_HAS_VDSO_ARCH_DATA
select ARCH_INLINE_READ_LOCK if !PREEMPTION
select ARCH_INLINE_READ_LOCK_BH if !PREEMPTION
select ARCH_INLINE_READ_LOCK_IRQ if !PREEMPTION
[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: linux-next: manual merge of the tip tree with the loongarch tree
2025-03-03 3:50 Stephen Rothwell
@ 2025-04-01 4:42 ` Stephen Rothwell
0 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Stephen Rothwell @ 2025-04-01 4:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Huacai Chen
Cc: Thomas Gleixner, Ingo Molnar, H. Peter Anvin, Peter Zijlstra,
Huacai Chen, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Linux Next Mailing List,
Nam Cao, Thomas Weißschuh, Wentao Guan, Yuli Wang
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1504 bytes --]
Hi all,
On Mon, 3 Mar 2025 14:50:19 +1100 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb•auug.org.au> wrote:
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the tip tree got a conflict in:
>
> arch/loongarch/Kconfig
>
> between commit:
>
> 30051fca4509 ("LoongArch: Enable UBSAN (Undefined Behavior Sanitizer)")
>
> from the loongarch tree and commit:
>
> d2862bb9d9ca ("LoongArch: vDSO: Switch to generic storage implementation")
>
> from the tip tree.
>
> I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary. This
> is now fixed as far as linux-next is concerned, but any non trivial
> conflicts should be mentioned to your upstream maintainer when your tree
> is submitted for merging. You may also want to consider cooperating
> with the maintainer of the conflicting tree to minimise any particularly
> complex conflicts.
>
> diff --cc arch/loongarch/Kconfig
> index 0043d5d4b5ea,d7ddf2a43e63..000000000000
> --- a/arch/loongarch/Kconfig
> +++ b/arch/loongarch/Kconfig
> @@@ -30,7 -30,7 +30,8 @@@ config LOONGARC
> select ARCH_HAS_SET_MEMORY
> select ARCH_HAS_SET_DIRECT_MAP
> select ARCH_HAS_TICK_BROADCAST if GENERIC_CLOCKEVENTS_BROADCAST
> + select ARCH_HAS_UBSAN
> + select ARCH_HAS_VDSO_ARCH_DATA
> select ARCH_INLINE_READ_LOCK if !PREEMPTION
> select ARCH_INLINE_READ_LOCK_BH if !PREEMPTION
> select ARCH_INLINE_READ_LOCK_IRQ if !PREEMPTION
This is now a conflict between the loongarch tree and Linus' tree.
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell
[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* linux-next: manual merge of the tip tree with the loongarch tree
@ 2025-05-05 3:56 Stephen Rothwell
2025-05-28 1:23 ` Stephen Rothwell
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Stephen Rothwell @ 2025-05-05 3:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Thomas Gleixner, Ingo Molnar, H. Peter Anvin, Peter Zijlstra,
Huacai Chen
Cc: Charlie Jenkins, Huacai Chen, Linux Kernel Mailing List,
Linux Next Mailing List, Youling Tang
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1830 bytes --]
Hi all,
Today's linux-next merge of the tip tree got a conflict in:
arch/loongarch/kernel/entry.S
between commit:
d62879a8b16c ("LoongArch: Enable HAVE_ARCH_STACKLEAK")
from the loongarch tree and commit:
7ace1602abf2 ("LoongArch: entry: Migrate ret_from_fork() to C")
from the tip tree.
I fixed it up (I think - see below) and can carry the fix as
necessary. This is now fixed as far as linux-next is concerned, but any
non trivial conflicts should be mentioned to your upstream maintainer
when your tree is submitted for merging. You may also want to consider
cooperating with the maintainer of the conflicting tree to minimise any
particularly complex conflicts.
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell
diff --cc arch/loongarch/kernel/entry.S
index 77f6fb9146a2,2abc29e57381..000000000000
--- a/arch/loongarch/kernel/entry.S
+++ b/arch/loongarch/kernel/entry.S
@@@ -78,25 -77,21 +78,23 @@@ SYM_CODE_START(handle_syscall
SYM_CODE_END(handle_syscall)
_ASM_NOKPROBE(handle_syscall)
- SYM_CODE_START(ret_from_fork)
+ SYM_CODE_START(ret_from_fork_asm)
UNWIND_HINT_REGS
- bl schedule_tail # a0 = struct task_struct *prev
- move a0, sp
- bl syscall_exit_to_user_mode
+ move a1, sp
+ bl ret_from_fork
+ STACKLEAK_ERASE
RESTORE_STATIC
RESTORE_SOME
RESTORE_SP_AND_RET
- SYM_CODE_END(ret_from_fork)
+ SYM_CODE_END(ret_from_fork_asm)
- SYM_CODE_START(ret_from_kernel_thread)
+ SYM_CODE_START(ret_from_kernel_thread_asm)
UNWIND_HINT_REGS
- bl schedule_tail # a0 = struct task_struct *prev
- move a0, s1
- jirl ra, s0, 0
- move a0, sp
- bl syscall_exit_to_user_mode
+ move a1, sp
+ move a2, s0
+ move a3, s1
+ bl ret_from_kernel_thread
+ STACKLEAK_ERASE
RESTORE_STATIC
RESTORE_SOME
RESTORE_SP_AND_RET
[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: linux-next: manual merge of the tip tree with the loongarch tree
2025-05-05 3:56 linux-next: manual merge of the tip tree with the loongarch tree Stephen Rothwell
@ 2025-05-28 1:23 ` Stephen Rothwell
0 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Stephen Rothwell @ 2025-05-28 1:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Huacai Chen
Cc: Thomas Gleixner, Ingo Molnar, H. Peter Anvin, Peter Zijlstra,
Charlie Jenkins, Huacai Chen, Linux Kernel Mailing List,
Linux Next Mailing List, Youling Tang
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2109 bytes --]
Hi all,
On Mon, 5 May 2025 13:56:58 +1000 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb•auug.org.au> wrote:
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the tip tree got a conflict in:
>
> arch/loongarch/kernel/entry.S
>
> between commit:
>
> d62879a8b16c ("LoongArch: Enable HAVE_ARCH_STACKLEAK")
>
> from the loongarch tree and commit:
>
> 7ace1602abf2 ("LoongArch: entry: Migrate ret_from_fork() to C")
>
> from the tip tree.
>
> I fixed it up (I think - see below) and can carry the fix as
> necessary. This is now fixed as far as linux-next is concerned, but any
> non trivial conflicts should be mentioned to your upstream maintainer
> when your tree is submitted for merging. You may also want to consider
> cooperating with the maintainer of the conflicting tree to minimise any
> particularly complex conflicts.
>
>
> diff --cc arch/loongarch/kernel/entry.S
> index 77f6fb9146a2,2abc29e57381..000000000000
> --- a/arch/loongarch/kernel/entry.S
> +++ b/arch/loongarch/kernel/entry.S
> @@@ -78,25 -77,21 +78,23 @@@ SYM_CODE_START(handle_syscall
> SYM_CODE_END(handle_syscall)
> _ASM_NOKPROBE(handle_syscall)
>
> - SYM_CODE_START(ret_from_fork)
> + SYM_CODE_START(ret_from_fork_asm)
> UNWIND_HINT_REGS
> - bl schedule_tail # a0 = struct task_struct *prev
> - move a0, sp
> - bl syscall_exit_to_user_mode
> + move a1, sp
> + bl ret_from_fork
> + STACKLEAK_ERASE
> RESTORE_STATIC
> RESTORE_SOME
> RESTORE_SP_AND_RET
> - SYM_CODE_END(ret_from_fork)
> + SYM_CODE_END(ret_from_fork_asm)
>
> - SYM_CODE_START(ret_from_kernel_thread)
> + SYM_CODE_START(ret_from_kernel_thread_asm)
> UNWIND_HINT_REGS
> - bl schedule_tail # a0 = struct task_struct *prev
> - move a0, s1
> - jirl ra, s0, 0
> - move a0, sp
> - bl syscall_exit_to_user_mode
> + move a1, sp
> + move a2, s0
> + move a3, s1
> + bl ret_from_kernel_thread
> + STACKLEAK_ERASE
> RESTORE_STATIC
> RESTORE_SOME
> RESTORE_SP_AND_RET
This is now a conflict between the loongarch tree and Linus' tree.
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell
[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2025-05-28 1:23 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2025-05-05 3:56 linux-next: manual merge of the tip tree with the loongarch tree Stephen Rothwell
2025-05-28 1:23 ` Stephen Rothwell
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2025-03-03 3:50 Stephen Rothwell
2025-04-01 4:42 ` Stephen Rothwell
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox