From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from desiato.infradead.org (desiato.infradead.org [90.155.92.199]) (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 81C4518B479 for ; Tue, 30 Jul 2024 20:10:01 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=90.155.92.199 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1722370203; cv=none; b=as9YrvhPTF9PfBukJ8lPRs2PVcOcPjQvU7CtxHKtzUYHKnjQMRW4TW/JASdaEnmHt0j7k32licI6LL9W+UxN0TTBBjqrnZWJE/UTEaUAraG3I2x8yPS4yPvYQM77307rx7K8rIdqjJ8zcl+UkmfFOaAF6Q0Z0bfVXuJ34MNwXdc= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1722370203; c=relaxed/simple; bh=iLOeGKnDishYvfMscY5qaYBG9052ZD8smIYRwg+XmSA=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=BQCTF3Fnu6ovQw3RdC8aExv9TvUA+iyTIdc8cipWq/U9A54IBL8wrc0tmZh/Uj9ARtBpUslYzgw7E5syoCXsHp7ZgnbeNfMbuPciIc1lPExhy8Pe+u3AEXW8S3vXtWL9I4UduWWONELuxXroAVzMk0ai6hGS6XrzVGxZfrF3nTg= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=infradead.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=infradead.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=infradead.org header.i=@infradead.org header.b=NpaD22tN; arc=none smtp.client-ip=90.155.92.199 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=infradead.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=infradead.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=infradead.org header.i=@infradead.org header.b="NpaD22tN" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=infradead.org; s=desiato.20200630; h=In-Reply-To:Content-Type:MIME-Version: References:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Sender:Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description; bh=ygQcz9ZWLapBmOyXGj0quqijSOH9bRVxNbuCShyt1GA=; b=NpaD22tNnm6z/JoHW31XYFIsxu 3Upz7sTMBbRoVE2dztLkXfeAN9yEg4W3iIkTQzzeMzphQPIYRJla8yAYPgDfM7TFu2AoplqlDrR0E pr/lIlyETGgiV4iIvEJZdHiItnNr+88i9IBHAvB2fxB0E4UzROLpkd9kwRuLrxBMws1WZrt8Q9Pzy GlSISn/8l77aYfxoYValUh8M1evu9zMMYLGm90oAsAIm7qX2xSuo4JcPCtkK+oxolbaxEbh3fCwJp j6zgS5yRJBOx5SCDBe8sV8GOSI/xhCxmLH661bYAoQXj99Ykiog7ViROFe/lFAVyiCy/fd1GhlKWl 16S/VamQ==; Received: from j130084.upc-j.chello.nl ([24.132.130.84] helo=noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net) by desiato.infradead.org with esmtpsa (Exim 4.97.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1sYtAK-000000054sl-1TD4; Tue, 30 Jul 2024 20:09:50 +0000 Received: by noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 8F95D3003EA; Tue, 30 Jul 2024 22:09:47 +0200 (CEST) Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2024 22:09:47 +0200 From: Peter Zijlstra To: Guenter Roeck Cc: Jens Axboe , Linus Torvalds , Andy Lutomirski , Ingo Molnar , Peter Anvin , Linux Kernel Mailing List , the arch/x86 maintainers Subject: Re: Linux 6.11-rc1 Message-ID: <20240730200947.GT33588@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net> References: <20240730192237.GR33588@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net> <231e7a2e-7e2e-4b82-b084-8943b2236de0@kernel.dk> <20240730193841.GS33588@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: On Tue, Jul 30, 2024 at 01:04:49PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote: > On 7/30/24 12:38, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 30, 2024 at 01:31:18PM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote: > > > On 7/30/24 1:22 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > > > On Tue, Jul 30, 2024 at 11:53:31AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > > > > > > > > Which makes me think it's asm_exc_int3 just recursively failing. > > > > > > > > Sounds like text_poke() going sideways, there's a jump_label fail out > > > > there: > > > > > > > > https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20240730132626.GV26599@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net > > > > > > No change with this applied... > > > > > > Also not sure if you read my link, but a few things to note: > > > > > > - It only happens with gcc-11 here. I tried 12/13/14 and those > > > are fine, don't have anything older > > > > One of my test boxes has 4.4 4.6 4.8 4.9 5 6 8 9 10 11 12 13 > > > > (now I gotta go figure out wth 7 went :-) And yeah, we don't support > > most of those version anymore (phew). > > > > So if its easy to setup, I could try older GCCs. > > > > WFM with gcc 9.4, 10.3, 12.4, and 13.3. gcc 11.4 and 11.5 both fail. 10.5 and 13.2 worked for me, and I can confirm 11.4 makes it go boom. > Maybe I should just switch to a more recent version of gcc and call it a day, > in the hope that it is a compiler (or qemu) problem and doesn't just hide > the problem. > > Thoughts ? Tempting, but I think it would be good to figure out what in GCC-11 makes it sad, gcc-11 is still well within the supported range of GCCs afaik. Lets see if its something that wants to be bisected.