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 DAB84404BF2 for ; Mon, 20 Jul 2026 11:50:49 +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=1784548251; cv=none; b=tVqyM4BFU7Cy8V8saVrG3IK55a7FDj0EokOAbPPxM+YGcB/gyu0aP23MQRlH4WpHLwwymCnyCz6csbtVnZHjXswCRCcs8PoGIP/prbl0ZrrYR2cJRf/1rVFVP/4lihk/KhcTEih3cfFS2AqF3QUm/Dy3EVPeYUkp8tV4DFZqwdo= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1784548251; c=relaxed/simple; bh=iP84Zwl7DElLoZZcw01N9hnyozoySmk9iqXBXJo4/so=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=NZMkd6KQh60ZBE/z2WaVhz1lEAYuXOXJMiIwzsDELZy4/kNuQ1WqRq0OOOXFgwOUptMYVqb1GFjdZWjzQ8bSjbK31U0tjGLwymlHXsbDPIM5CKe7Y/Jl82heSCiJl3SWGn/ZVW/pDWmurBxF5zbo/Ele4sAhu6qHwxdTJaEuBN4= 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=jBdI2GQ+; dkim=permerror (0-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b=oNJsRAjH; 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="jBdI2GQ+"; dkim=permerror (0-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b="oNJsRAjH" From: Nam Cao DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linutronix.de; s=2020; t=1784548248; 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: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=iP84Zwl7DElLoZZcw01N9hnyozoySmk9iqXBXJo4/so=; b=jBdI2GQ+mT/faQgd7O67+Rjn/Zgqqifrl5fq0qo8oWfjraPV6fNV9giodMPntCMqnxcWPq cyJmECeTb+x5EOvvTQJRCItHZvEF7QFDhJqrFfhjHHcOTu0Q4pIzoLaqszf7gsTU87aoS2 UrBlaiJTv5lG5AO92lGOkDu8PmU04LpWaSgEzPKTQvd9i2JKhD5CrUZfsf4HXje83GkY2S kJZL61+sp699Pi0hYzr0iKAXBgHdRhO+0BaKHGMokDcriW9MmzkO6HyWfKsS2MsAZRDaSk /CI1fcErFaECx+2BbJ65uunuPkq1ip3B4xg9gH4DSh+v9gPly6eRkgw8zaJomg== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linutronix.de; s=2020e; t=1784548248; 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: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=iP84Zwl7DElLoZZcw01N9hnyozoySmk9iqXBXJo4/so=; b=oNJsRAjHHPKKfuZ/e7cfazEW9gVugArNW+QhLyDdG86dt2sZ1VvC94q2DVroZatEfk7OAn hOy175G/eLq5ezDw== To: Thomas =?utf-8?Q?Wei=C3=9Fschuh?= Cc: Paul Walmsley , Palmer Dabbelt , Albert Ou , Alexandre Ghiti , linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, =?utf-8?Q?Andr=C3=A9?= Almeida , Mathieu Desnoyers , Thomas Gleixner , Peter Zijlstra , Sebastian Andrzej Siewior Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 5/5] riscv: vdso: Implement __vdso_futex_robust_try_unlock() In-Reply-To: <20260720134032-032dc788-414c-4d7e-b72b-57fa5311adc8@linutronix.de> References: <20260717142423-c5be3c7c-d4cb-4a68-8e85-3e3754e42666@linutronix.de> <87ldb5evs8.fsf@yellow.woof> <20260720134032-032dc788-414c-4d7e-b72b-57fa5311adc8@linutronix.de> Date: Mon, 20 Jul 2026 13:50:47 +0200 Message-ID: <87fr1dev6w.fsf@yellow.woof> 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-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Thomas Wei=C3=9Fschuh writes: > I don't think we would get such an error currently. > The cc-option check in the Makefile will fall back to non-zacas for the > compat vDSO, but arch_futex_robust_unlock_get_pop() will treat it as zaca= s. Switching to .option and the cc-option will be gone. See below. > Ok. I don't understand the .option suggestion :-) We wouldn't touch -march compile option in Makefiles. Instead, we do .option push .option arch, .option pop Whenever the ZACAS instruction is used. See https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20260717-riscv-no-zacas-zabha-in-march-v1-1-82= b5b0799fb6@iscas.ac.cn/ Nam