From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on inbox.vuxu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.2 required=5.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL,T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 Received: (qmail 8440 invoked from network); 31 May 2022 10:25:07 -0000 Received: from mother.openwall.net (195.42.179.200) by inbox.vuxu.org with ESMTPUTF8; 31 May 2022 10:25:07 -0000 Received: (qmail 19807 invoked by uid 550); 31 May 2022 10:25:05 -0000 Mailing-List: contact musl-help@lists.openwall.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-ID: Reply-To: musl@lists.openwall.com Received: (qmail 1960 invoked from network); 31 May 2022 07:50:40 -0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1653983427; bh=DYza2QPqADe/lZfxtchO+aNrFJm+ciR3u9LbScHZcrs=; h=References:In-Reply-To:From:Date:Subject:To:Cc:From; b=LxkrD6e40E3ifwv3q2/1gQPhh7SSjMR0z/b/tDPWcHw8GEB97gg6eQ5setYlX2nL5 IfIKCw8zwF4WdnM3oLmQ57pxi6lcBHJaBvk8potWrKPYhyOHo3QK3ySaz2L8KznLbZ iSgpJqixltPV34GDXSChvYCm18MTkfiNL4OY7cNvFhayi8Vc6r6Rz+NcfH2Am6gxLP Pe5wte0HScizHXU1A7cuEYbQMLlsMuYYybAeFly2ehQpHiZrHAKd57DbQJnZnGFBpK KRkIarJKdKOJBPwF4w3uRngeYwoy/qkHwedbSoPqu1j0U2K+uKHKkEHOhhXxeINMux /zLTS9YT+mWwQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530pe7vnnGIMZV8laa92XdwA8kNAFpYDaeuPxZ8tFooohS5gIXQs zEhaT9MKvQzl9frColyk/t7WzUvgG/rhlYF+r5I= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyya/hWo2NRabv3OOld40MCqgldoCzg8cr3aQSBneE0PTnnLJuSL+d3VBjv70lhDMQ7+aErakru/r54rqMAy3c= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6102:f06:b0:337:9881:5031 with SMTP id v6-20020a0561020f0600b0033798815031mr20369600vss.67.1653983426782; Tue, 31 May 2022 00:50:26 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <358025d1-28e6-708b-d23d-3f22ae12a800@xen0n.name> In-Reply-To: From: Huacai Chen Date: Tue, 31 May 2022 15:50:16 +0800 X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: Message-ID: To: Arnd Bergmann Cc: musl@lists.openwall.com, WANG Xuerui , Linus Torvalds , linux-arch , GNU C Library , Yoshinori Sato , Peter Zijlstra , Marc Zyngier , Masahiro Yamada , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Jiaxun Yang , ACPI Devel Maling List , Jianmin Lv , linux-pci , Ard Biesheuvel , Huacai Chen Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Subject: Re: [musl] Re: [GIT PULL] asm-generic changes for 5.19 Hi, Arnd, On Mon, May 30, 2022 at 11:56 PM Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > On Mon, May 30, 2022 at 5:00 PM WANG Xuerui wrote: > > On 5/30/22 21:01, Huacai Chen wrote: > > > > Thanks for the recognition from both of you; it is my honor and pleasure > > to contribute to the LoongArch port and to Linux in general. > > > > As I'm still not entirely satisfied with my kernel development skills, > > plus my day job is not kernel-related nor Loongson/LoongArch-related at > > all, listing me as reviewer should be enough for now. I will take care > > of the arch as long as I have the hardware. > > Thanks, sounds good to me. > > > BTW, there were already several breakages when rebasing the previous > > revision (I believe it's commit 215da6d2dac0 ("MAINTAINERS: Add > > maintainer information for LoongArch")) on top of linus' tree. > > Right, at least most of these should be fairly easy to address by disabling > the corresponding features. For the allmodconfig build, I see some > warnings that are introduced in gcc-12.1 across all architectures, and > those can be ignored for now. > > Some of the errors already have fixes on top of the 215da6d2dac0 > commit, but some of the other commits look like we should leave > them out here. > > I also see some conflicts between local symbol definitions and device > drivers such as > > arch/loongarch/include/asm/loongarch.h:240:29: note: previous > definition of 'csr_writel' with type 'void(u32, u32)' {aka > 'void(unsigned int, unsigned int)'} > 240 | static __always_inline void csr_writel(u32 val, u32 reg) > | ^~~~~~~~~~ > drivers/media/platform/amphion/vpu_core.h:10:5: error: conflicting > types for 'csr_readl'; have 'u32(struct vpu_core *, u32)' {aka > 'unsigned int(struct vpu_core *, unsigned int)'} > > and > > drivers/usb/cdns3/cdns3-imx.c:85: error: "PS_MASK" redefined [-Werror] > > I would suggest renaming the loongarch specific symbols here, though we > may want to also change those drivers to use less generic identifiers. OK, loongarch specific symbols will be renamed. > > > Now I see > > the loongarch-next HEAD is already rebased on top of what I believe to > > be the current main branch, however I vaguely remember that it's not > > good to base one's patches on top of "some random commit", so I wonder > > whether the current branch state is appropriate for a PR? > > You are correct, a pull request should always be based on an -rc, orat least > have the minimum set of dependencies. The branch was previously > based on top of the spinlock implementation, which is still the best > place to start here. I have a difficult problem to select the base. Take swiotlb_init() as an example: If I select 5.18-rc1, I should use swiotlb_init(1); if I select Linus' latest tree, I should use swiotlb_init(true, SWIOTLB_VERBOSE). However, if I select 5.18-rc1, linux-next will have a build error because the code there expect swiotlb_init(true, SWIOTLB_VERBOSE). Huacai > > Arnd