linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V3 00/20] Add basic ACPI support for RISC-V

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Tue, 07 Mar 2023 06:13:22 +0000
From:   Conor Dooley <conor@...nel.org>
To:     Sunil V L <sunilvl@...tanamicro.com>
CC:     linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org, linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
        Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>,
        Albert Ou <aou@...s.berkeley.edu>,
        "Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
        Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>,
        Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
        Anup Patel <apatel@...tanamicro.com>,
        Andrew Jones <ajones@...tanamicro.com>,
        Atish Patra <atishp@...osinc.com>,
        'Conor Dooley ' <conor.dooley@...rochip.com>,
        llvm@...ts.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 00/20] Add basic ACPI support for RISC-V



On 7 March 2023 05:06:16 GMT, Sunil V L <sunilvl@...tanamicro.com> wrote:
>On Mon, Mar 06, 2023 at 09:51:09PM +0000, Conor Dooley wrote:
>> Hey Sunil,
>> 
>> On Fri, Mar 03, 2023 at 07:06:27PM +0530, Sunil V L wrote:
>> > This patch series enables the basic ACPI infrastructure for RISC-V.
>> > Supporting external interrupt controllers is in progress and hence it is
>> > tested using poll based HVC SBI console and RAM disk.
>> > 
>> > The first patch in this series is one of the patch from Jisheng's
>> > series [1] which is not merged yet. This patch is required to support
>> > ACPI since efi_init() which gets called before sbi_init() can enable
>> > static branches and hits a panic.
>> > 
>> > Patch 2 and 3 are ACPICA patches which are not merged into acpica yet
>> > but a PR is raised already.
>> > 
>> > Below are two ECRs approved by ASWG.
>> > RINTC - https://drive.google.com/file/d/1R6k4MshhN3WTT-hwqAquu5nX6xSEqK2l/view
>> > RHCT - https://drive.google.com/file/d/1nP3nFiH4jkPMp6COOxP6123DCZKR-tia/view
>> > 
>> > The series depends on Anup's IPI improvement series [2].
>> > 
>> > [1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20220821140918.3613-1-jszhang@kernel.org/
>> > [2] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20230103141221.772261-7-apatel@ventanamicro.com/T/
>> 
>> Building a clang-15 allmodconfig (I didn't try gcc) with this series, and
>> Anup's IPI bits, results in a broken build, due to failings in cmpxchg:
>> 
>> /stuff/linux/drivers/platform/surface/aggregator/controller.c:61:25: error: call to __compiletime_assert_335 declared with 'error' attribute: BUILD_BUG failed
>>         while (unlikely((ret = cmpxchg(&c->value, old, new)) != old)) {
>>                                ^
>Hi Conor,
>
>I am able to build without any of these issues using clang-15. I am
>wondering whether the base is proper. I had rebased on top of the master
>and couple of patches from IPI series were already merged in the master.
>
>Do you mind verifying with my branch
>https://github.com/vlsunil/linux/commits/acpi_b1_us_review_ipi17_V3?

I can check that later I suppose.

>
>Or if you could provide me your branch details, I can look further.

6.3-rc1, with both series applied, sans Anups applied patches.