[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: [sparc64] locking/atomic, kernel OOPS on running stress-ng



On Wed, Jul 07, 2021 at 10:47:06AM +0300, Anatoly Pugachev wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 6, 2021 at 3:00 PM Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com> wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 06, 2021 at 02:51:06PM +0300, Anatoly Pugachev wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jul 6, 2021 at 12:11 PM Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com> wrote:
> > > > Fixes: ff5b4f1ed580c59d ("locking/atomic: sparc: move to ARCH_ATOMIC")
> > > > Signed-off-by: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
> > > > Reported-by: Anatoly Pugachev <matorola@gmail.com>
> > > > Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>
> > > > Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@lists.infradead.org>
> > > > ---
> > > >  arch/sparc/include/asm/cmpxchg_64.h | 2 +-
> > > >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/arch/sparc/include/asm/cmpxchg_64.h b/arch/sparc/include/asm/cmpxchg_64.h
> > > > index 8c39a9981187..12d00a42c0a3 100644
> > > > --- a/arch/sparc/include/asm/cmpxchg_64.h
> > > > +++ b/arch/sparc/include/asm/cmpxchg_64.h
> > > > @@ -201,7 +201,7 @@ static inline unsigned long __cmpxchg_local(volatile void *ptr,
> > > >  #define arch_cmpxchg64_local(ptr, o, n)                                        \
> > > >    ({                                                                   \
> > > >         BUILD_BUG_ON(sizeof(*(ptr)) != 8);                              \
> > > > -       cmpxchg_local((ptr), (o), (n));                                 \
> > > > +       arch_cmpxchg_local((ptr), (o), (n));                                    \
> > > >    })
> > > >  #define arch_cmpxchg64(ptr, o, n)      arch_cmpxchg64_local((ptr), (o), (n))
> > >
> > >
> > > Mark, thanks, fixed...
> > > tested on git kernel 5.13.0-11788-g79160a603bdb-dirty (dirty - cause
> > > patch has been applied).
> >
> > Great! Thanks for confirming.
> >
> > Peter, are you happy to pick that (full commit in last mail), or should
> > I send a new copy?
> 
> It would be nice if patch could hit the kernel before v5.14-rc1

Absolutely; I'll resend this on it's own so that it's easier for folk to
pick, and I'll poke people about picking it.

Mark.


Reply to: