Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH] [RFC] arm64: export this_cpu_has_cap | From | Suzuki K Poulose <> | Date | Mon, 1 Nov 2021 09:52:22 +0000 |
| |
On 01/11/2021 09:40, Will Deacon wrote: > 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...
Unfortunately thats how it works today. We should fix this.
Mathieu, Greg,
Do you have any thoughts on how to address this ?
> > But in any case, I'm happy to take this as long as it can wait until the > second half of the merge window.
Yes, please. Thats the quickest path to merging this patch.
Suzuki
| |