linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: manual merge of the tip tree with the pm tree

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]

Message-ID: <aCYM-A_PYHK2kjSd@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 15 May 2025 17:49:12 +0200
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To: Mario Limonciello <mario.limonciello@....com>
Cc: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
	Dhananjay Ugwekar <dhananjay.ugwekar@....com>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the tip tree with the pm tree


* Mario Limonciello <mario.limonciello@....com> wrote:

> On 5/12/2025 12:23 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > Hi all,
> > 
> > On Mon, 12 May 2025 14:55:17 +1000 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au> wrote:
> > > 
> > > Today's linux-next merge of the tip tree got a conflict in:
> > > 
> > >    drivers/cpufreq/amd-pstate.c
> > > 
> > > between commit:
> > > 
> > >    608a76b65288 ("cpufreq/amd-pstate: Add support for the "Requested CPU Min frequency" BIOS option")
> > > 
> > > from the pm tree and commit:
> > > 
> > >    d7484babd2c4 ("x86/msr: Rename 'rdmsrl_on_cpu()' to 'rdmsrq_on_cpu()'")
> > > 
> > > from the tip tree.
> > > 
> > > I fixed it up (the former removed a line updated by the latter) and can
> > > carry the fix as necessary. This is now fixed as far as linux-next is
> > > concerned, but any non trivial conflicts should be mentioned to your
> > > upstream maintainer when your tree is submitted for merging.  You may
> > > also want to consider cooperating with the maintainer of the conflicting
> > > tree to minimise any particularly complex conflicts.
> > 
> > Actually it needed the fix up below.
> > 
> 
> Ingo,
> 
> Can you guys make an immutable branch for Rafael to merge into linux-pm for
> this change?
> 
> I can redo the amd-pstate merge based on that immutable branch.
> 
> Rafael,
> 
> If you want to just carry the fixup that's fine too.  Just LMK what you
> need.

If it's only about rdmsrl_on_cpu(), how about the simple compatibility 
wrapper below instead, applied to the x86 tree?

Can merge it into -tip and tomorrow's -next would resolve this without 
any changes or merges done to the PM tree.

Thanks,

	Ingo

===============>
 arch/x86/include/asm/msr.h | 1 +
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)

diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/msr.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/msr.h
index a9ce56fc8785..4096b8af4ba7 100644
--- a/arch/x86/include/asm/msr.h
+++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/msr.h
@@ -329,6 +329,7 @@ static inline int wrmsr_safe_regs_on_cpu(unsigned int cpu, u32 regs[8])
 /* Compatibility wrappers: */
 #define rdmsrl(msr, val) rdmsrq(msr, val)
 #define wrmsrl(msr, val) wrmsrq(msr, val)
+#define rdmsrl_on_cpu(cpu, msr, q) rdmsrq_on_cpu(cpu, msr, q)
 
 #endif /* __ASSEMBLER__ */
 #endif /* _ASM_X86_MSR_H */