From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A7CD5C77B6F for ; Tue, 11 Apr 2023 17:54:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229712AbjDKRye (ORCPT ); Tue, 11 Apr 2023 13:54:34 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:37080 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229593AbjDKRyd (ORCPT ); Tue, 11 Apr 2023 13:54:33 -0400 Received: from dfw.source.kernel.org (dfw.source.kernel.org [139.178.84.217]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 66ACB5241; Tue, 11 Apr 2023 10:54:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp.kernel.org (relay.kernel.org [52.25.139.140]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by dfw.source.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id ECB1B625B5; Tue, 11 Apr 2023 17:54:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 634C6C4339E; Tue, 11 Apr 2023 17:54:28 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1681235671; bh=54LJu/uSR+OsrlePoQijbNxy1ZDn64og6zc21iXSGBs=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=FZM7uyjNGHb190bgTNK8XIfUWc5OWWpnCC2DBIMmQ0TOjo8htAv2XNx2Mg+0YBHhS BSeyE2SA9B8oxWjfSu/2Na+nvWy+upQ4VyB9OdYWwm6Hr7Ma3Xw17W3arxD9KayRwT HmIPJ8NTIoyLmiw95MjWATlmInH5pX2zxPfljlImUnhkSDcYBwlUPbJ9RFor+5H0+g GLF4YJWt59Oy8p/ME+f7vAW+/2alSHw6Gh0RrbtYVR42eyP1ZqstkUzE2qeAahk1Du NjgRtXpolpQ/7ZMUu1BSJyOQ28v6iAtN50jLnQVlZcEvjL7CmwG5b8XIkDOhe7Zxmf hzo/Z9oXsk15A== Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2023 18:54:24 +0100 From: Will Deacon To: Steven Rostedt Cc: Mark Rutland , Florent Revest , catalin.marinas@arm.com, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-trace-kernel@vger.kernel.org, bpf@vger.kernel.org, mhiramat@kernel.org, ast@kernel.org, daniel@iogearbox.net, andrii@kernel.org, kpsingh@kernel.org, jolsa@kernel.org, xukuohai@huaweicloud.com, lihuafei1@huawei.com, Linus Torvalds Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 0/5] Add ftrace direct call for arm64 Message-ID: <20230411175423.GD23143@willie-the-truck> References: <20230405180250.2046566-1-revest@chromium.org> <20230411124749.7aeea715@gandalf.local.home> <20230411170807.GA23143@willie-the-truck> <20230411134456.728551f8@gandalf.local.home> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20230411134456.728551f8@gandalf.local.home> User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-trace-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Apr 11, 2023 at 01:44:56PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Tue, 11 Apr 2023 18:08:08 +0100 > Will Deacon wrote: > > > On Tue, Apr 11, 2023 at 12:47:49PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > > > On Tue, 11 Apr 2023 16:56:45 +0100 > > > Mark Rutland wrote: > > > > > > > IIUC Steve was hoping to take the FUNCTION_GRAPH_RETVAL series through the > > > > trace tree, and if that's still the plan, maybe both should go that way? > > > > > > The conflict is minor, and I think I prefer to still have the ARM64 bits go > > > through the arm64 tree, as it will get better testing, and I don't like to > > > merge branches ;-) > > > > > > I've added Linus to the Cc so he knows that there will be conflicts, but as > > > long as we mention it in our pull request, with a branch that includes the > > > solution, it should be fine going through two different trees. > > > > If it's just the simple asm-offsets conflict that Mark mentioned, then that > > sounds fine to me. However, patches 3-5 don't seem to have anything to do > > I guess 3 and 5 are not, but patch 4 adds arm64 code to the samples (as > it requires arch specific asm to handle the direct trampolines). Sorry, yes, I was thinking of arch/arm64/ and then failed spectacularly at communicating :) > > with arm64 at all and I'd prefer those to go via other trees (esp. as patch > > 3 is an independent -stable candidate and the last one is a bpf selftest > > change which conflicts in -next). > > > > So I'll queue the first two in arm64 on a branch (or-next/ftrace) based > > on trace-direct-v6.3-rc3. > > Are 3-5 dependent on those changes? If not, I can pull them into my tree. Good question. Florent? Will