From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754007AbcALVoH (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 Jan 2016 16:44:07 -0500 Received: from mout.gmx.net ([212.227.17.21]:62048 "EHLO mout.gmx.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753735AbcALVoD (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 Jan 2016 16:44:03 -0500 Subject: Re: linux-next: strange commit in the parisc-hd tree To: Michael Ellerman , Stephen Rothwell , Parisc List References: <20160111092822.4b4c0233@canb.auug.org.au> <569422C8.4000706@gmx.de> <1452551991.23317.3.camel@ellerman.id.au> Cc: linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org From: Helge Deller Message-ID: <5695739A.9050700@gmx.de> Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2016 22:43:54 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.1.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1452551991.23317.3.camel@ellerman.id.au> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:H0N6kIurKajVS+3jZ1vpAMxogwZVsqROj9d79/E06dvOrdCsMF+ yoLWygzGkcr0giupn3G2j8ql4uVxNy8u5qb8G48q9wSV/1V5EEI9IqAzZP0FgTspksji/Z+ YXF89ethk9SH+Wf1ZqpsjQv+bWuGIFfiFyGrcSop0AfajuBUmrUVIxKEMKczb3ExowlN6mZ wTGwN9zwHUdreWsdiVvlw== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V01:K0:T2jhV2ot4pw=:kcg9ct1h4geIRMydkExHKi WraxQvMzvYo9ZKqusYdYqftWWBID2F3TcnJyN567R3m5299IsxhNG+7RK8cy+8ujw8Oo3KQiH zhTfDHv5KwjBEG+dLJNfS1viEXnZ6uMW3Jjx1EmBqIS9G9soiDVMNw8eg+7HARDitfDHoJBPn 7BzniZelHAujZZrlG+yWUy7bykQ85BEk9zgAnbCSsSYG1JoGMbD8O4UZKJPC/NotX9v06+CN3 9/G0bdyrc8/8+o1QCGscwW3Dwh/OesZSNlaZOHZ8ZQZhT0UmT6UXyeSxphuzbv+Au/44bOjxh KC/hjlCO1/P+t6CXjD/fpnfsyjCEWMefvIQqEduZ48OmTTNEKMK2YwaIyQFijUZj7VfhV+oX6 hTSfuJH0mSIU8l+lYFK2duAErktIrZLN5HS6hd2XgaGUcW+Bm4Zm2NtKKswIZiaS+FeUNkQNV DtHONcyPpjGaV75ESnwyCP2yBwZI8Zhx4e3302c2bFg+zOMTz9nEi53bbZThRBLkMLdDujmMS MXomJPMweNbyH/U2YZlxH7BbaMTCCFKrC5DeZHUXEjerUxxPQxAtIWmUqtj0puAL4y6I75RzY UuynaMRzFg43Psc/JV2pmdhhuN3kc4KGIaZr4ru2lpGlk/gajWmPqpu4ZT8UY07D1SLLVTW1s SQMs0NsCU0IOfIRaNYv3k5r3h57NH6L0pJJmkGS+tunf4mJQJ/+brH0iA8NhBNYaVFFjnGHFr 3cRIGXGZ4FUS/sBFKUewxw82iQ/5hhSvXZK6bI6YIjgdvccly39jKVmjyJbO6cSJ9oOC4BJLx YIgsm5X Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 11.01.2016 23:39, Michael Ellerman wrote: > On Mon, 2016-01-11 at 22:46 +0100, Helge Deller wrote: >> On 10.01.2016 23:28, Stephen Rothwell wrote: >>> I noticed the following commit in the parisc-hd tree today: >>> >>> 43122681dd75 ("Fix __ARCH_SI_PREAMBLE_SIZE on parisc") >>> >>> which among other things says: >>> >>> This patch is not planned to be committed as it currently is. >> >> Right, I split it up into two. >> >>> [...] Please remove it from linux-next inclusion until it is ready. >> >> Sure, I just removed it now. >> >>> Delibeately introducing a patch to linux-next that may well cause build breakage >>> in other architectures just before the merge window opens is a bit antisocial. >> >> That was in no way my intention. >> In contrary, I wanted to see if other platforms are affected by the same bug without knowing. >> Do you by any chance know if it broke some of the existing platforms? >> If yes, that would be valuable info... >> >> Just in case people want to know what this is all about: >> On parisc I found __ARCH_SI_PREAMBLE_SIZE to have a wrong value in 64bit kernel builds. >> Patch which fixes it is here: >> https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/7994821/ >> >> To prevent other (existing and future) architectures to run into the same >> problem I wanted to test this patch via linux-next and inform them: >> http://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/deller/parisc-linux.git/commit/?h=test__ARCH_SI_PREAMBLE_SIZE > > That doesn't fire on powerpc, ie. we have it correct. It really seems that parisc was the only architecture left which had a wrong value for __ARCH_SI_PREAMBLE_SIZE. I followed Stephens suggestion to try it via the zero day build farm and it was only reported one problem (for parisc). Tree is here: http://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/deller/parisc-linux.git/log/?h=for-next-test > Though I wonder why it's not just defined using offsetof? Possibly just that > it's awkward with the way the headers are organised. Yes. Helge