From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752291AbeBSJgl (ORCPT ); Mon, 19 Feb 2018 04:36:41 -0500 Received: from mail-wr0-f193.google.com ([209.85.128.193]:43013 "EHLO mail-wr0-f193.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751941AbeBSJgj (ORCPT ); Mon, 19 Feb 2018 04:36:39 -0500 X-Google-Smtp-Source: AH8x224HnPTnUPLIjlUrrN3Zfzb+YtkuAOtwt6rnvknOSaj4SfO2gay2DHuISNQGr/Ky21iOXr1SNA== Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2018 10:36:35 +0100 From: Ingo Molnar To: Peter Zijlstra Cc: Tim Chen , David Woodhouse , hpa@zytor.com, tglx@linutronix.de, torvalds@linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-tip-commits@vger.kernel.org, Borislav Petkov Subject: Re: [tip:x86/pti] x86/speculation: Use IBRS if available before calling into firmware Message-ID: <20180219093635.su3hqx5bn2jibnoi@gmail.com> References: <1518362359-1005-1-git-send-email-dwmw@amazon.co.uk> <1518808600.7876.49.camel@infradead.org> <66f94cb1-8160-56e0-680c-2e847ae05893@linux.intel.com> <20180217102616.vcwatxsgj2vunlew@gmail.com> <20180219092017.GN25201@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20180219092017.GN25201@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170609 (1.8.3) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org * Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Sat, Feb 17, 2018 at 11:26:16AM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > Note that PeterZ was struggling with intermittent boot hangs yesterday as well, > > which hangs came and went during severeal (fruitless) bisection attempts. Then at > > a certain point the hangs went away altogether. > > > > The symptoms for both his and your hangs are consistent with an alignment > > dependent bug. > > Mine would consistently hang right after > > "Freeing SMP alternatives memory: 44K" > > At one point I bisected it to commit: > > a06cc94f3f8d ("x86/build: Drop superfluous ALIGN from the linker script") So, just to make sure this commit had no effect: I cannot really see anything wrong with that commit, it does a single substantial change, which is to remove this explicit alignment: . = ALIGN(8); TEXT_TEXT which seems fine to me, since it expanded to: . = ALIGN(8); ALIGN_FUNCTION(); \ ... which expanded to: . = ALIGN(8); . = ALIGN(8); ... ... which duplication the commit removed. ... where all the relevant defitions of TEXT_TEXT and ALIGN_FUNCTION are unconditional and not overriden anywhere for arch/x86 builds. I.e. the commit is a NOP AFAICS. Thanks, Ingo