From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from relay3-d.mail.gandi.net (relay3-d.mail.gandi.net [217.70.183.195]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 775D4101F2 for ; Tue, 15 Aug 2023 10:23:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail.gandi.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4669560006; Tue, 15 Aug 2023 10:22:57 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=xenomai.org; s=gm1; t=1692094977; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=4fA9eh4MEhjwxnogYFwgAog37qUhKisrkRYVIQTxNfM=; b=GcNa4F4f+oMLBwxgC93bNspP3vQkPwqvbscvZxGkZtNhT4dYWiLislCaR1WSlgKPe0kDmo ApmoYJ4UjfGXjdJq5yVIXTr1KFWBWtU49m/Dh6xJJKIfMabax9GTSRm6g6E2ZLf+MXV/ny zxx53i8tGGsdiWdlZUlEKPBvsvlbestqGuWetYFm8sCGvv3ux8/D7lfGk1YflaOKtgNdgl 82VbzjoRZEOvQ3VzSyGtsY++kmekJZVQk5tTOXGAuG0LyJkHxw29E1fEmnCuxIPKyQn3IQ r2XpqwKM1W+3MAYhRr2mI/OVyXomQwHsYpQOX6YD50P/D7pLWE1nGbjZqtYRcw== References: <87edlkeu1b.fsf@xenomai.org> <87tttiswuf.fsf@xenomai.org> <163ed99e-bb3f-afe0-27d6-eda78c65e6c5@siemens.com> <87ttt8bbrw.fsf@xenomai.org> <20b3bceb-b63b-400e-8d8c-da5252a24f5d@siemens.com> User-agent: mu4e 1.8.11; emacs 28.2 From: Philippe Gerum To: Jan Kiszka Cc: Florian Bezdeka , Xenomai Subject: Re: v6.1.y-dovetail-rebase Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2023 12:18:28 +0200 In-reply-to: <20b3bceb-b63b-400e-8d8c-da5252a24f5d@siemens.com> Message-ID: <87bkf84nb7.fsf@xenomai.org> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: xenomai@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-GND-Sasl: rpm@xenomai.org Jan Kiszka writes: > On 09.08.23 15:11, Philippe Gerum wrote: >> >> Jan Kiszka writes: >> >>> On 09.08.23 07:52, Jan Kiszka wrote: >>>> On 01.08.23 15:26, Philippe Gerum wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Florian Bezdeka writes: >>>>> >>>>>> On Mon, 2023-07-10 at 08:59 +0200, Florian Bezdeka wrote: >>>>>>> On Thu, 2023-07-06 at 21:00 +0200, Philippe Gerum wrote: >>>>>>>> Hi, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Jan Kiszka writes: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Hi Philippe, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> quick feedback on latest rebasing: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> https://source.denx.de/Xenomai/linux-dovetail/-/commit/8f155631c8b51731dfc2ae5145d4dcc68f2ed7ed >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> This was likely accidentally folded, right? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> It looks so. This conditional statement appeared upstream during the >>>>>>>> v6.0 cycle it seems, and was unfortunately left unfixed in the dovetail >>>>>>>> patch for this entire series. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Furthermore, I will factor this change out into a separate commit in >>>>>>>>> merging v6.1.y-dovetail, for better traceability: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> diff --git a/arch/x86/mm/fault.c b/arch/x86/mm/fault.c >>>>>>>>> index ce8bdd804bc7..c843bf352999 100644 >>>>>>>>> --- a/arch/x86/mm/fault.c >>>>>>>>> +++ b/arch/x86/mm/fault.c >>>>>>>>> @@ -1466,7 +1466,7 @@ void do_user_addr_fault(struct pt_regs *regs, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> /* The fault is fully completed (including releasing mmap lock) */ >>>>>>>>> if (fault & VM_FAULT_COMPLETED) >>>>>>>>> - return; >>>>>>>>> + goto out; >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> /* >>>>>>>>> * If we need to retry the mmap_lock has already been released, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> To my understanding, this was a dovetail fix that applied to previous >>>>>>>>> versions as well. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Only to v6.0, however this series is not maintained dovetail-wise >>>>>>>> anymore, so this stayed under the radar. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> FYI: This change fixes a real issue here. The 6.1-rebase branch made it >>>>>>> through a 24h stress test while the "merge" branch failed. Happily >>>>>>> waiting for the next release... >>>>>> >>>>>> Do we have a idea / plan when the next 6.1 dovetail release will >>>>>> happen? My internal customer is waiting for that and I want to avoid >>>>>> backporting to 6.1.34. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> There is a brewing rebase to v6.1.42 pending tests here, no challenging >>>>> source conflict. I pushed the tree untagged to the v6.1.y-rebase branch >>>>> if you want to give it a try before Jan updates the stable branch. >>>>> >>>> >>>> We are testing against -rebase anyway (but that needs a trigger which I >>>> just provided). The merging branch is only updated once there is a >>>> release tagged. >>>> >>> >>> Passed with the Xenomai 3 tests: >>> >>> https://source.denx.de/Xenomai/xenomai-images/-/pipelines/17252 >>> >>> But can we update to 6.1.44 directly? Florian mentioned that there are >>> Downfall-related fixes in that release. >>> >>> Jan >> >> yes, .44 is actually brewing here already. >> > > Now we are .45 even. Will this one be tagged? CI looks good so far. > Nope, .44 was broken due to [1]. .45 looks better with this fix in place. This issue triggered on kvm/arm64 w/ PROVE_LOCKING enabled. [1] https://source.denx.de/Xenomai/linux-dovetail/-/commit/60ae6e4ea6a074698be4d999e96e9c3697b18ea1 -- Philippe.