Messages in this thread Patch in this message | | | Date | Mon, 1 Nov 2021 09:40:45 +0000 | From | Will Deacon <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] [RFC] arm64: export this_cpu_has_cap |
| |
On Mon, Nov 01, 2021 at 09:34:08AM +0000, Suzuki K Poulose wrote: > On 01/11/2021 09:01, Will Deacon wrote: > > On Fri, Oct 29, 2021 at 07:06:23PM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote: > > > On Fri, Oct 29, 2021 at 02:31:23PM +0100, Suzuki K Poulose wrote: > > > > On 29/10/2021 12:30, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > > > > From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> > > > > > > > > > > It's now used in a coresight driver that can be a loadable module: > > > > > > > > > > ERROR: modpost: "this_cpu_has_cap" [drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-trbe.ko] undefined! > > > > > > > > > > Fixes: 8a1065127d95 ("coresight: trbe: Add infrastructure for Errata handling") > > > > > > > > Reviewed-by: Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com> > > > > Tested-by: Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com> > > > > > > > > Will, Catalin, Mathieu, > > > > > > > > Do you have a preference on how this fix can be pulled in ? This may > > > > be safe to go via coresight tree if it is not too late. Otherwise, > > > > it could go via the arm64 tree. > > > > > > I think Will already closed/tagged the arm64 tree for the upcoming > > > merging window, though he could take it as a fix afterwards. > > > > > > If it doesn't conflict with the arm64 for-next/core, it's fine by me to > > > go through the coresight tree. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> > > > > > --- > > > > > Not sure if we actually want this to be exported, this is my local > > > > > workaround for the randconfig build bot. > > > > > --- > > > > > arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c | 1 + > > > > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) > > > > > > > > > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c > > > > > index ecbdff795f5e..beccbcfa7391 100644 > > > > > --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c > > > > > +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c > > > > > @@ -2864,6 +2864,7 @@ bool this_cpu_has_cap(unsigned int n) > > > > > return false; > > > > > } > > > > > +EXPORT_SYMBOL(this_cpu_has_cap); > > > > > > EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL? I think this_cpu_has_cap() is a bit more more > > > specialised than cpus_have_const_cap(). > > > > > > With that: > > > > > > Acked-by: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com> > > > > Yes, at this stage I think it's best for this to go via the Coresight tree. > > So with the _GPL export: > > > > Acked-by: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org> > > > > If that doesn't work for some reason, I can take it next week after the > > initial arm64 queue has been merged. Please just let me know. > > As I understand correctly, this will now need to go via arm64 tree. The > CoreSight tree changes are pulled into Greg's tree and the next it will > happen is for the next release. Usually the fixes don't end up there > during the -rc cycles. So, I believe it is better if this goes via > arm64.
Hmm, are you saying that Coresight drivers don't receive fixes outside of the merge window? That sounds sub-optimal...
But in any case, I'm happy to take this as long as it can wait until the second half of the merge window.
Will
| |