From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from galois.linutronix.de (Galois.linutronix.de [193.142.43.55]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AF0021802E; Wed, 24 Jan 2024 09:48:47 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=193.142.43.55 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1706089729; cv=none; b=KFsIaOz97fiJEiqnvhGhl7cm3NqATvHgNM8f7jlvogwkOHxDnBUfI0bQUV7fIdw5TvZhiz0y1MWwtLCIIPQmbM2foxKc+vWdBd8+bhSYP4Fmbe5RXXn/uyOs7TWiveHABl5qVxF/lhVM1YzyWs9MIHk1/xym9lIQhUuczyNaZ8k= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1706089729; c=relaxed/simple; bh=Sjiggc9hkp7vO14FeTQLrBBVejAbxEkPLML7a37rMKg=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=UPyeNriFR7ntC3z+HHpXnbgSaOhLYNc6SC+1OXvL74DXYG4zydaJ11BMoxI4qnB8AYfPwqep7uh/2KdssxSgCqk5Hy6Ddhu1rH/DmWkljeqq+Pr0tp7cgxW0dubePGs36B089LSY8v92ffVCFkrT2l4Jdm0/yevh53PeS8IqTyo= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linutronix.de; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linutronix.de; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b=u0CscK2a; dkim=permerror (0-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b=rJb798b+; arc=none smtp.client-ip=193.142.43.55 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linutronix.de Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linutronix.de Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b="u0CscK2a"; dkim=permerror (0-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b="rJb798b+" Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2024 10:48:43 +0100 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linutronix.de; s=2020; t=1706089725; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=kHoOnI11BiHLHgLsYhCo+j3C2xme3YS/1KU+DJN93tw=; b=u0CscK2avvuVXP+urhisBRY0urTPjA1KhHiU44hlXScwk41TZ52d0608i43pSk6heLAvap Nnw6oubLiMWI/idXk/hxlEEEYnjalpTg67E/C3zYqXTT+Jqm6yA9hej2qOj5U+Han24J4M jT3QrQQ9ytUL9o9AwFyrXZ7ibvBmDr6CXKaOcWJZCL0KOTtucjMUrvMGAETSsr9WzZirXP wzxSSuDEVJ8eISkkd3GXh20e+WevMwWCjy4Qn31xV5pPsmhxltdN4tKLIpWV/tcqNptqo+ IaqWtfSaxC++R22+zJB3ixKAZbwIW6YCiKPyAz6DkC9iorjrY+T/f40ova5IRw== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linutronix.de; s=2020e; t=1706089725; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=kHoOnI11BiHLHgLsYhCo+j3C2xme3YS/1KU+DJN93tw=; b=rJb798b+AKo8nedTM0XuZsJt3WO/06RZxc9BC4JLI+ntoERMUx3rW3RuBStRKcBZiwOxyi q8qalIIGYrPbMeBA== From: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior To: Clark Williams Cc: LKML , linux-rt-users , Steven Rostedt , Thomas Gleixner , Carsten Emde , John Kacur , Daniel Wagner , Tom Zanussi , Pavel Machek , Joseph Salisbury Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCE] 6.6.12-rt20 Message-ID: <20240124094843.K-b1_mn7@linutronix.de> References: <170561158585.591793.15929255265114320850@demetrius> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <170561158585.591793.15929255265114320850@demetrius> On 2024-01-18 20:59:45 [-0000], Clark Williams wrote: > Hello RT-list! Hi Clark, > I'm pleased to announce the 6.6.12-rt20 stable release. I've been looking over it and it looks okay. Then I compared how it would do it vs your outcome and noticed this: --- a/arch/riscv/kernel/cpufeature.c +++ b/arch/riscv/kernel/cpufeature.c @@ -575,12 +575,6 @@ static int check_unaligned_access(void *param) if (per_cpu(misaligned_access_speed, cpu) != RISCV_HWPROBE_MISALIGNED_UNKNOWN) return; - page = alloc_pages(GFP_NOWAIT, get_order(MISALIGNED_BUFFER_SIZE)); - if (!page) { - pr_warn("Can't alloc pages to measure memcpy performance"); - return; - } - /* Make an unaligned destination buffer. */ dst = (void *)((unsigned long)page_address(page) | 0x1); /* Unalign src as well, but differently (off by 1 + 2 = 3). */ You shouldn't allocate that page. Nobody will free it, that page is passed via an argument now. Please drop hunk. While at it, do you think you can drop patch preempt-Put-preempt_enable-within-an-instrumentation.patch or revert commit c15abad8f7159 ("preempt: Put preempt_enable() within an instrumentation*() section.") I've been looking over it and it is fixed as of v6.6 so this patch is no longer needed. > Enjoy! > Clark Sebastian