On Fri, Oct 22, 2021 at 09:14:38AM +0200, Greg KH wrote:
On Thu, Oct 21, 2021 at 05:47:31PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
Hi Mathieu,
[CC Greg]
On Thu, Oct 21, 2021 at 10:35:31AM -0600, Mathieu Poirier wrote:
On Thu, Oct 21, 2021 at 09:53:14AM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
On Wed, Oct 20, 2021 at 09:42:07AM -0600, Mathieu Poirier wrote:
On Tue, Oct 19, 2021 at 05:31:38PM +0100, Suzuki K Poulose wrote:
Suzuki K Poulose (15): arm64: Add Neoverse-N2, Cortex-A710 CPU part definition arm64: errata: Add detection for TRBE overwrite in FILL mode arm64: errata: Add workaround for TSB flush failures arm64: errata: Add detection for TRBE write to out-of-range coresight: trbe: Add a helper to calculate the trace generated coresight: trbe: Add a helper to pad a given buffer area coresight: trbe: Decouple buffer base from the hardware base coresight: trbe: Allow driver to choose a different alignment coresight: trbe: Add infrastructure for Errata handling coresight: trbe: Workaround TRBE errata overwrite in FILL mode coresight: trbe: Add a helper to determine the minimum buffer size coresight: trbe: Make sure we have enough space coresight: trbe: Work around write to out of range arm64: errata: Enable workaround for TRBE overwrite in FILL mode arm64: errata: Enable TRBE workaround for write to out-of-range address
Documentation/arm64/silicon-errata.rst | 12 + arch/arm64/Kconfig | 111 ++++++ arch/arm64/include/asm/barrier.h | 16 +- arch/arm64/include/asm/cputype.h | 4 + arch/arm64/kernel/cpu_errata.c | 64 +++ arch/arm64/tools/cpucaps | 3 + drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-trbe.c | 394 +++++++++++++++++-- 7 files changed, 567 insertions(+), 37 deletions(-)
I have applied this set.
Mathieu -- the plan here (which we have discussed on the list [1]) is for the first four patches to be shared with arm64. Since you've gone ahead and applied the whole series, please can you provide me a stable branch with the first four patches only so that I can include them in the arm64 tree?
Failing that, I can create a branch for you to pull and apply the remaining patches on top.
Please let me know.
Coresight patches flow through Greg's tree and as such the coresight-next tree gets rebased anyway. I will remove the first 4 patches and push again. By the way do you also want to pick up patches 14 and 16 since they are concerned with "arch/arm64/Kconfig" or should I keep them?
I'll take the first 4 and put them on a stable branch, which you can choose to pull if you like (but please don't rebase it or we'll end up with duplicate commits). The rest of the patches, including the later Kconfig changes, are yours but I doubt they'll apply cleanly without the initial changes.
Are you sure Greg rebases everything? That sounds a bit weird to me, as it means it's impossible to share branches with other trees. How do you usually handle this situation?
No, I never rebase my trees. For coresight patches I take them as emailed patches due to previous history requiring me to review them all myself. If this is an issue here, I can always take a pull request as long as you all don't want my review :)
Can you expand on the "previous history requiring" you to review coresight patches?
Rebasing the coresight-next tree when patches are pulled in the char-misc tree causes problems when features involve other subsystems. I definitely appreciate reviews of coresight patches from anyone. The subsystem has grown to be very complex and more reviewers mean higher probabilities of catching problems. There has to be a way for that to continue while making it easier to collaborate with other subsystems.
For this particular patchset, Will has picked up the first 4 patches, I will pick up patches 5 to 13 and patches 14 and 15 will have to go in the next cycle. I doubt this is the best we can do.
Regards, Mathieu
thanks,
greg k-h
On Fri, Oct 22, 2021 at 09:13:11AM -0600, Mathieu Poirier wrote:
On Fri, Oct 22, 2021 at 09:14:38AM +0200, Greg KH wrote:
On Thu, Oct 21, 2021 at 05:47:31PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
Hi Mathieu,
[CC Greg]
On Thu, Oct 21, 2021 at 10:35:31AM -0600, Mathieu Poirier wrote:
On Thu, Oct 21, 2021 at 09:53:14AM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
On Wed, Oct 20, 2021 at 09:42:07AM -0600, Mathieu Poirier wrote:
On Tue, Oct 19, 2021 at 05:31:38PM +0100, Suzuki K Poulose wrote: > Suzuki K Poulose (15): > arm64: Add Neoverse-N2, Cortex-A710 CPU part definition > arm64: errata: Add detection for TRBE overwrite in FILL mode > arm64: errata: Add workaround for TSB flush failures > arm64: errata: Add detection for TRBE write to out-of-range > coresight: trbe: Add a helper to calculate the trace generated > coresight: trbe: Add a helper to pad a given buffer area > coresight: trbe: Decouple buffer base from the hardware base > coresight: trbe: Allow driver to choose a different alignment > coresight: trbe: Add infrastructure for Errata handling > coresight: trbe: Workaround TRBE errata overwrite in FILL mode > coresight: trbe: Add a helper to determine the minimum buffer size > coresight: trbe: Make sure we have enough space > coresight: trbe: Work around write to out of range > arm64: errata: Enable workaround for TRBE overwrite in FILL mode > arm64: errata: Enable TRBE workaround for write to out-of-range > address > > Documentation/arm64/silicon-errata.rst | 12 + > arch/arm64/Kconfig | 111 ++++++ > arch/arm64/include/asm/barrier.h | 16 +- > arch/arm64/include/asm/cputype.h | 4 + > arch/arm64/kernel/cpu_errata.c | 64 +++ > arch/arm64/tools/cpucaps | 3 + > drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-trbe.c | 394 +++++++++++++++++-- > 7 files changed, 567 insertions(+), 37 deletions(-)
I have applied this set.
Mathieu -- the plan here (which we have discussed on the list [1]) is for the first four patches to be shared with arm64. Since you've gone ahead and applied the whole series, please can you provide me a stable branch with the first four patches only so that I can include them in the arm64 tree?
Failing that, I can create a branch for you to pull and apply the remaining patches on top.
Please let me know.
Coresight patches flow through Greg's tree and as such the coresight-next tree gets rebased anyway. I will remove the first 4 patches and push again. By the way do you also want to pick up patches 14 and 16 since they are concerned with "arch/arm64/Kconfig" or should I keep them?
I'll take the first 4 and put them on a stable branch, which you can choose to pull if you like (but please don't rebase it or we'll end up with duplicate commits). The rest of the patches, including the later Kconfig changes, are yours but I doubt they'll apply cleanly without the initial changes.
Are you sure Greg rebases everything? That sounds a bit weird to me, as it means it's impossible to share branches with other trees. How do you usually handle this situation?
No, I never rebase my trees. For coresight patches I take them as emailed patches due to previous history requiring me to review them all myself. If this is an issue here, I can always take a pull request as long as you all don't want my review :)
Can you expand on the "previous history requiring" you to review coresight patches?
Rebasing the coresight-next tree when patches are pulled in the char-misc tree causes problems when features involve other subsystems. I definitely appreciate reviews of coresight patches from anyone. The subsystem has grown to be very complex and more reviewers mean higher probabilities of catching problems. There has to be a way for that to continue while making it easier to collaborate with other subsystems.
For this particular patchset, Will has picked up the first 4 patches, I will pick up patches 5 to 13 and patches 14 and 15 will have to go in the next cycle. I doubt this is the best we can do.
And that won't work either because some defines declared in in patches 1 to 4 are needed in patches 10 and 13. I will send you a pull request for this cycle.
Regards, Mathieu
thanks,
greg k-h
-
Mathieu Poirier