On Thu, May 30, 2024 at 08:28:17PM +0200, Thierry Reding wrote:
> On Thu May 30, 2024 at 6:55 PM CEST, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > On Fri, May 24, 2024 at 12:57:58PM -0700, Abhinav Kumar wrote:
> > > Hello
> > >
> > > On 5/24/2024 12:55 PM, P
On Fri, May 24, 2024 at 12:57:58PM -0700, Abhinav Kumar wrote:
> Hello
>
> On 5/24/2024 12:55 PM, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > Hello!
> >
> > I get the following allmodconfig build error on x86 in next-20240523:
> >
> > Traceback (most recent call
Hello!
I get the following allmodconfig build error on x86 in next-20240523:
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "drivers/gpu/drm/msm/registers/gen_header.py", line 970, in
main()
File "drivers/gpu/drm/msm/registers/gen_header.py", line 951, in main
On Fri, Jun 23, 2023 at 04:29:39PM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 22, 2023 at 05:12:02PM +0200, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
> > On 6/22/23 10:53, Qi Zheng wrote:
> > > @@ -1067,33 +1068,27 @@ static unsigned long shrink_slab(gfp_t gfp_mask,
> > > int nid,
> > > if (!mem_cgroup_disabled()
On Thu, Apr 13, 2023 at 04:32:32PM +0100, Rui Salvaterra wrote:
> Hi, Paul,
>
> On Thu, 13 Apr 2023 at 15:43, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> >
> > My guess would be that you have CONFIG_RCU_EXP_CPU_STALL_TIMEOUT set to
> > some small non-zero number, for example, you
On Thu, Apr 13, 2023 at 08:30:02AM +0100, Rui Salvaterra wrote:
> Hi again, everyone.
>
> So, while preparing to file the bug report with the requested
> information, I got a trace completely unrelated to DRM (on a swapon
> call, it seems).
>
> [4.868340] rcu: INFO: rcu_sched detected
On Sat, Jul 30, 2022 at 02:06:10AM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> On 7/29/22 22:12, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > On Fri, Jul 29, 2022 at 11:41:55PM -0300, André Almeida wrote:
> > > Hi Paul,
> > >
> > > Às 23:25 de 29/07/22, Paul E. McKenney escreveu:
> &g
On Fri, Jul 29, 2022 at 11:41:55PM -0300, André Almeida wrote:
> Hi Paul,
>
> Às 23:25 de 29/07/22, Paul E. McKenney escreveu:
> > Hello!
> >
> > I am seeing the following in allmodconfig builds of recent -next on x86:
> >
> > drivers/gpu
Hello!
I am seeing the following in allmodconfig builds of recent -next on x86:
drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/../display/dc/dml/dcn32/display_mode_vba_32.c: In
function
‘DISPCLKDPPCLKDCFCLKDeepSleepPrefetchParametersWatermarksAndPerformanceCalculation’:
On Thu, Feb 10, 2022 at 02:58:24PM +0800, Zhouyi Zhou wrote:
> In function do_remove_conflicting_framebuffers, if device is NULL, there
> will be null pointer reference. The patch add a check to the if expression.
>
> Signed-off-by: Zhouyi Zhou
> ---
> Dear Linux folks
>
> I discover this bug
On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 11:03:20AM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 16, 2020 at 5:16 PM Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Dec 16, 2020 at 10:52:06AM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> > > On Wed, Dec 16, 2020 at 2:14 AM syzbot
> > > wrote:
> > &g
On Wed, Dec 16, 2020 at 10:52:06AM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 16, 2020 at 2:14 AM syzbot
> wrote:
> >
> > Hello,
> >
> > syzbot found the following issue on:
> >
> > HEAD commit:94801e5c Merge tag 'pinctrl-v5.10-3' of git://git.kernel.o..
> > git tree: upstream
> >
> equivalent for GFP_NOWAIT, hence this check can't go wrong due to
> memalloc_no*_save/restore contexts.
>
> Cc: Paul E. McKenney
> Cc: Christoph Lameter
> Cc: Pekka Enberg
> Cc: David Rientjes
> Cc: Joonsoo Kim
> Cc: Andrew Morton
> Cc: Peter Zijlstra
> Cc
On Thu, Oct 01, 2020 at 10:25:06AM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 01 2020 at 10:17, Joonas Lahtinen wrote:
> > Quoting paul...@kernel.org (2020-09-29 02:30:58)
> >> CONFIG_PREEMPT_COUNT is now unconditionally enabled and will be
> >> removed. Cleanup the leftovers before doing so.
> >
On Thu, Sep 17, 2020 at 09:52:30AM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 17, 2020 at 12:39 AM Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 11:43:02PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> > > On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 10:58 PM Paul E. McKenney
> > > wrot
On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 11:43:02PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 10:58 PM Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 10:29:06PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> > > On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 5:29 PM Paul E. McKenney
> > > wrot
On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 10:29:06PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 5:29 PM Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 09:37:17AM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> > > On Tue, Sep 15, 2020 at 7:35 PM Linus Torvalds
> > > wrote:
>
On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 08:23:52PM +0100, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 14, 2020 at 11:55:24PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > But just look at any check which uses preemptible(), especially those
> > which check !preemptible():
>
> hmm.
>
> +++ b/include/linux/preempt.h
> @@ -180,7
On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 11:32:00AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 8:29 AM Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> >
> > All fair, but some of us need to write code that must handle being
> > invoked from a wide variety of contexts.
>
> Note that I th
On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 09:37:17AM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 15, 2020 at 7:35 PM Linus Torvalds
> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Sep 15, 2020 at 1:39 AM Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > >
> > > OTOH, having a working 'preemptible()' or maybe better named
> > > 'can_schedule()' check makes tons
On Mon, Sep 14, 2020 at 01:59:15PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 14, 2020 at 1:45 PM Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> >
> > Recently merged code does:
> >
> > gfp = preemptible() ? GFP_KERNEL : GFP_ATOMIC;
> >
> > Looks obviously correct, except for the fact that preemptible() is
>
On Wed, May 13, 2020 at 10:43:51PM +0100, Emil Velikov wrote:
> With earlier commits, the API no longer discards the const-ness of the
> sysrq_key_op. As such we can add the notation.
>
> Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman
> Cc: Jiri Slaby
> Cc: linux-ker...@vger.kernel.org
> Cc: &qu
irier #
> hwtracing/coresight/Kconfig
> Signed-off-by: Mauro Carvalho Chehab
For the memory-barrier.txt portions:
Reviewed-by: Paul E. McKenney
> ---
> Documentation/memory-barriers.txt| 2 +-
> Documentation/process/submit-checklist.rst | 2 +-
>
On Mon, Mar 30, 2020 at 03:00:35PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> Hi all, for all = rcu, cpuhotplug and perf maintainers
>
> We've hit an interesting new lockdep splat in our drm/i915 CI:
>
>
introduced into v5.6-rc1.
Fixes: 5b03f9d86880 ("drm/dp_mst: Add new quirk for Synaptics MST hubs")
Suggested-by: Chris Wilson
Suggested-by: Joe Perches
Suggested-by: Christoph Hellwig
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney
Cc: Maxime Ripard
Cc: David Airlie
Cc: Daniel Vetter
diff --g
On Thu, Feb 20, 2020 at 07:58:58AM +, Chris Wilson wrote:
> Quoting Alex Deucher (2020-02-20 02:52:32)
> > On Wed, Feb 19, 2020 at 7:42 PM Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > >
> > > Hello!
> > >
> > > A box with GCC 4.8.3 compiler didn't like drm_dp_
Hello!
A box with GCC 4.8.3 compiler didn't like drm_dp_mst_topology.c. The
following (lightly tested) patch makes it happy and seems OK for newer
compilers as well.
Is this of interest?
Thanx, Paul
The following commit has been merged into the core/rcu branch of tip:
Commit-ID: 1feace5d6a4a1acf44dde2bfb5c36cc0b1cf559c
Gitweb:
https://git.kernel.org/tip/1feace5d6a4a1acf44dde2bfb5c36cc0b1cf559c
Author:Paul E. McKenney
AuthorDate:Mon, 23 Sep 2019 15:22:15 -07:00
On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 02:57:26PM +0200, Joonas Lahtinen wrote:
> Quoting paul...@kernel.org (2019-10-22 22:12:08)
> > From: "Paul E. McKenney"
> >
> > This commit replaces the use of rcu_swap_protected() with the more
> > intuitively appealing rcu
Reviewed-by: Jerry Hoemann # hpwdt.rst
Acked-by: Paul E. McKenney
> ---
> Documentation/RCU/rculist_nulls.txt | 2 +-
> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/idle-states.txt | 2 +-
> Documentation/locking/spinlocks.rst | 4 ++--
>
On Tue, Apr 09, 2019 at 02:04:11PM -0400, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> - On Apr 9, 2019, at 1:55 PM, paulmck paul...@linux.ibm.com wrote:
> [...]
> > The current state is not horrible, so my thought would be to give it
> > some time to see if better thoughts arise.
> >
> > Either way,
> >> >> > j...@joelfernandes.org
> >> >> >> >> > wrote:
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > > On Sun, Apr 07, 2019 at 03:26:16PM -0400,
gt; >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> > - On Apr 7, 2019, at 3:32 PM, Joel Fernandes, Google
> >> >> >> >> >> > j...@joelfernandes.org
> >> >> >> >> &g
7, 2019, at 3:32 PM, Joel Fernandes, Google
> >> >> > j...@joelfernandes.org
> >> >> > wrote:
> >> >> >
> >> >> > > On Sun, Apr 07, 2019 at 03:26:16PM -0400, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> >> >> > >> - On Apr 7, 2019, at 9:59
> >> - On Apr 7, 2019, at 9:59 AM, paulmck paul...@linux.ibm.com wrote:
> >> > >>
> >> > >> > On Sun, Apr 07, 2019 at 06:39:41AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> >> > >> >> On Sat, Apr 06, 2019 at 07:06:13PM -0400, Joel Fern
On Sat, Apr 06, 2019 at 01:33:27PM +, Joel Fernandes wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 05, 2019 at 04:28:35PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 03, 2019 at 09:20:39AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > On Wed, Apr 03, 2019 at 10:27:42AM -0400, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
>
On Sun, Apr 07, 2019 at 08:36:46PM -0400, Joel Fernandes wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 07, 2019 at 10:05:14AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > On Sun, Apr 07, 2019 at 03:46:13PM +, Joel Fernandes wrote:
> > > On Sun, Apr 07, 2019 at 06:59:37AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>
On Wed, Apr 03, 2019 at 09:20:39AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 03, 2019 at 10:27:42AM -0400, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> > - On Apr 3, 2019, at 9:32 AM, paulmck paul...@linux.ibm.com wrote:
> >
> > > On Tue, Apr 02, 2019 at 11:34:07AM -0400,
7, 2019 at 03:26:16PM -0400, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> > >> - On Apr 7, 2019, at 9:59 AM, paulmck paul...@linux.ibm.com wrote:
> > >>
> > >> > On Sun, Apr 07, 2019 at 06:39:41AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrot
On Sun, Apr 07, 2019 at 03:46:13PM +, Joel Fernandes wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 07, 2019 at 06:59:37AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > On Sun, Apr 07, 2019 at 06:39:41AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > On Sat, Apr 06, 2019 at 07:06:13PM -0400, Jo
On Sun, Apr 07, 2019 at 06:39:41AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 06, 2019 at 07:06:13PM -0400, Joel Fernandes wrote:
[ . . . ]
> > > diff --git a/include/asm-generic/vmlinux.lds.h
> > > b/include/asm-generic/vmlinux.lds.h
> > > index f8f
On Sat, Apr 06, 2019 at 07:06:13PM -0400, Joel Fernandes wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 05, 2019 at 04:28:35PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 03, 2019 at 09:20:39AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > On Wed, Apr 03, 2019 at 10:27:42AM -0400, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
>
On Tue, Apr 02, 2019 at 05:40:54PM +, Kuehling, Felix wrote:
> On 2019-04-02 10:29 a.m., Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > Having DEFINE_SRCU() or DEFINE_STATIC_SRCU() in a loadable module
> > requires that the size of the reserved region be increased, which is
> > not som
On Wed, Apr 03, 2019 at 10:27:42AM -0400, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> - On Apr 3, 2019, at 9:32 AM, paulmck paul...@linux.ibm.com wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Apr 02, 2019 at 11:34:07AM -0400, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> >> - On Apr 2, 2019, at 11:23 AM, paulmck paul...@linux.ibm.com wrote:
> >>
>
On Tue, Apr 02, 2019 at 11:34:07AM -0400, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> - On Apr 2, 2019, at 11:23 AM, paulmck paul...@linux.ibm.com wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Apr 02, 2019 at 11:14:40AM -0400, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> >> - On Apr 2, 2019, at 10:28 AM, paulmck paul...@linux.ibm.com wrote:
> >>
On Tue, Apr 02, 2019 at 02:40:54PM -0400, Joel Fernandes wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 02, 2019 at 08:23:34AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 02, 2019 at 11:14:40AM -0400, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> > > - On Apr 2, 2019, at 10:28 AM, paulmck paul...@l
includes dynamically
allocated srcu_struct structures), and therefore cannot tell whether it
is being called on something that has been passed to init_srcu_struct().
Thus the code added to drm_core_init() is a bit non-standard.
Reported-by: kbuild test robot
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney
Cc
of defining kfd_processes_srcu as a simple srcu_struct, initializing
it in amdgpu_amdkfd_init(), and cleaning it up in amdgpu_amdkfd_fini().
Reported-by: kbuild test robot
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney
Tested-by: kbuild test robot
Cc: Oded Gabbay
Cc: Alex Deucher
Cc: "Christian König"
On Tue, Apr 02, 2019 at 11:14:40AM -0400, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> - On Apr 2, 2019, at 10:28 AM, paulmck paul...@linux.ibm.com wrote:
>
> > Hello!
> >
> > This series prohibits use of DEFINE_SRCU() and DEFINE_STATIC_SRCU()
> > by loadable modules. The reason for this prohibition is the
Hello!
This series prohibits use of DEFINE_SRCU() and DEFINE_STATIC_SRCU()
by loadable modules. The reason for this prohibition is the fact
that using these two macros within modules requires that the size of
the reserved region be increased, which is not something we want to
be doing all that
, but I rather not
> if we just want to delete them anyway.
>
> As a starting point, remove all index-files and references to 00-INDEX and
> see where the discussion is going.
For the RCU portions:
Acked-by: Paul E. McKenney
> Again, sorry for the insanely wide distribution.
&
On Wed, Mar 08, 2017 at 11:13:38AM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 08, 2017 at 12:16:45PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > Hi Paul,
> >
> > After merging the rcu tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64 allmodconfig)
> > failed like this:
> >
> > In file included from
On Fri, Aug 12, 2016 at 08:25:43PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 11:26:47AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > If my upcoming testing of the two changes together pans out, I will
> > give you a Tested-by -- I am guessing that you don't want to wait
> >
On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 12:38:59PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 11:50:21AM +0200, Johannes Berg wrote:
> > From: Johannes Berg
> >
> > This reverts commit fa7d81bb3c269a2ee38b6e4d569d9eb8be1a78ad.
> >
> > As Peter explained:
> > [...] lockless_dereference() is
On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 11:44:08AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 08:46:12AM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote:
> > We are only documenting that the read is outside of the lock, and do not
> > require strict ordering on the operation. In this case the more relaxed
> >
On Tue, Jul 05, 2016 at 10:25:12AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 05, 2016 at 01:53:03PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c
> > b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem.c
> > index d3502c0603e5..1f91f187b2a8 100644
> > ---
On Thu, Nov 26, 2015 at 01:43:40PM +, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> As of 3c3b177a9369 ("reservation: add suppport for read-only access
> using rcu") linux/reservation.h uses lockdep macros:
>
> +#define reservation_object_held(obj) lockdep_is_held(&(obj)->lock.base)
>
> This results in
On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 05:09:55AM +0400, Andrey Utkin wrote:
> There's no such thing as "list_struct".
>
> Signed-off-by: Andrey Utkin
May as well get group rates on the acks... ;-)
Acked-by: Paul E. McKenney
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/
On Fri, Jun 06, 2014 at 03:56:52PM +, David Laight wrote:
> From: Behalf Of Ken Helias
> > All other add functions for lists have the new item as first argument and
> > the
> > position where it is added as second argument. This was changed for no good
> > reason in this function and makes
On Sun, Aug 14, 2011 at 09:02:27PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
[NOTE:
We already have a bug entry for tracking regressions from 3.0:
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=40982
but there are no reports linked to it, mostly because Maciej is on vacation,
but also because the
On Sun, Aug 14, 2011 at 09:02:27PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> [NOTE:
> We already have a bug entry for tracking regressions from 3.0:
>
> http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=40982
>
> but there are no reports linked to it, mostly because Maciej is on vacation,
> but also
61 matches
Mail list logo
