From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 37934C433EF for ; Thu, 27 Jan 2022 13:55:49 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S239555AbiA0Nzs (ORCPT ); Thu, 27 Jan 2022 08:55:48 -0500 Received: from ams.source.kernel.org ([145.40.68.75]:50544 "EHLO ams.source.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S236903AbiA0Nzr (ORCPT ); Thu, 27 Jan 2022 08:55:47 -0500 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (relay.kernel.org [52.25.139.140]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ams.source.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E77A8B8226E for ; Thu, 27 Jan 2022 13:55:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C21BBC340E4; Thu, 27 Jan 2022 13:55:44 +0000 (UTC) Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2022 08:55:43 -0500 From: Steven Rostedt To: Mark Rutland Cc: Sven Schnelle , Yinan Liu , linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, Sachin Sant , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, ardb@kernel.org, keescook@chromium.org, hca@linux.ibm.com Subject: Re: [powerpc] ftrace warning kernel/trace/ftrace.c:2068 with code-patching selftests Message-ID: <20220127085543.200dd38e@gandalf.local.home> In-Reply-To: References: <20220124114548.30241947@gandalf.local.home> <0fa0daec-881a-314b-e28b-3828e80bbd90@linux.alibaba.com> <20220127074601.41a3773d@rorschach.local.home> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.17.8 (GTK+ 2.24.33; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 27 Jan 2022 13:33:02 +0000 Mark Rutland wrote: > I want to get the regression fixed ASAP, so can we take a simple patch for -rc2 > which disables the build-time sort where it's currently broken (by limiting the > opt-in to arm and x86), then follow-up per-architecture to re-enable it if > desired/safe? I'm going to retest my patch that makes it an opt in for just x86 and arm (32bit). I'll be pushing that hopefully later today. I have some other patches to test as well. -- Steve