|
Revision tags: v6.6.25, v6.6.24, v6.6.23, v6.6.16, v6.6.15, v6.6.14, v6.6.13, v6.6.12, v6.6.11, v6.6.10, v6.6.9, v6.6.8, v6.6.7, v6.6.6, v6.6.5, v6.6.4, v6.6.3, v6.6.2, v6.5.11, v6.6.1, v6.5.10, v6.6, v6.5.9, v6.5.8, v6.5.7, v6.5.6, v6.5.5, v6.5.4, v6.5.3, v6.5.2, v6.1.51, v6.5.1, v6.1.50, v6.5, v6.1.49, v6.1.48, v6.1.46, v6.1.45, v6.1.44, v6.1.43, v6.1.42, v6.1.41, v6.1.40, v6.1.39, v6.1.38, v6.1.37, v6.1.36, v6.4, v6.1.35, v6.1.34, v6.1.33, v6.1.32, v6.1.31, v6.1.30, v6.1.29, v6.1.28, v6.1.27, v6.1.26, v6.3, v6.1.25, v6.1.24, v6.1.23, v6.1.22, v6.1.21, v6.1.20, v6.1.19, v6.1.18, v6.1.17, v6.1.16, v6.1.15, v6.1.14, v6.1.13, v6.2, v6.1.12, v6.1.11, v6.1.10, v6.1.9, v6.1.8, v6.1.7, v6.1.6, v6.1.5, v6.0.19, v6.0.18, v6.1.4, v6.1.3, v6.0.17, v6.1.2, v6.0.16, v6.1.1, v6.0.15, v6.0.14, v6.0.13, v6.1, v6.0.12, v6.0.11, v6.0.10, v5.15.80, v6.0.9, v5.15.79, v6.0.8, v5.15.78, v6.0.7, v5.15.77, v5.15.76, v6.0.6, v6.0.5, v5.15.75, v6.0.4, v6.0.3, v6.0.2, v5.15.74, v5.15.73, v6.0.1, v5.15.72, v6.0, v5.15.71, v5.15.70, v5.15.69, v5.15.68, v5.15.67, v5.15.66, v5.15.65, v5.15.64, v5.15.63, v5.15.62, v5.15.61, v5.15.60, v5.15.59, v5.19, v5.15.58, v5.15.57, v5.15.56, v5.15.55, v5.15.54, v5.15.53, v5.15.52, v5.15.51, v5.15.50, v5.15.49 |
|
| #
a1a5482a |
| 17-Jun-2022 |
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> |
x86/extable: Fix ex_handler_msr() print condition
On Fri, Jun 17, 2022 at 02:08:52PM +0300, Stephane Eranian wrote:
> Some changes to the way invalid MSR accesses are reported by the
> kernel is cau
x86/extable: Fix ex_handler_msr() print condition
On Fri, Jun 17, 2022 at 02:08:52PM +0300, Stephane Eranian wrote:
> Some changes to the way invalid MSR accesses are reported by the
> kernel is causing some problems with messages printed on the
> console.
>
> We have seen several cases of ex_handler_msr() printing invalid MSR
> accesses once but the callstack multiple times causing confusion on
> the console.
> The problem here is that another earlier commit (5.13):
>
> a358f40600b3 ("once: implement DO_ONCE_LITE for non-fast-path "do once" functionality")
>
> Modifies all the pr_*_once() calls to always return true claiming
> that no caller is ever checking the return value of the functions.
>
> This is why we are seeing the callstack printed without the
> associated printk() msg.
Extract the ONCE_IF(cond) part into __ONCE_LTE_IF() and use that to
implement DO_ONCE_LITE_IF() and fix the extable code.
Fixes: a358f40600b3 ("once: implement DO_ONCE_LITE for non-fast-path "do once" functionality")
Reported-by: Stephane Eranian <eranian@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Tested-by: Stephane Eranian <eranian@google.com>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/YqyVFsbviKjVGGZ9@worktop.programming.kicks-ass.net
show more ...
|
| #
7bc43ab2 |
| 17-Jun-2022 |
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> |
x86/extable: Fix ex_handler_msr() print condition
[ Upstream commit a1a5482a2c6e38a3ebed32e571625c56a8cc41a6 ]
On Fri, Jun 17, 2022 at 02:08:52PM +0300, Stephane Eranian wrote:
> Some changes to th
x86/extable: Fix ex_handler_msr() print condition
[ Upstream commit a1a5482a2c6e38a3ebed32e571625c56a8cc41a6 ]
On Fri, Jun 17, 2022 at 02:08:52PM +0300, Stephane Eranian wrote:
> Some changes to the way invalid MSR accesses are reported by the
> kernel is causing some problems with messages printed on the
> console.
>
> We have seen several cases of ex_handler_msr() printing invalid MSR
> accesses once but the callstack multiple times causing confusion on
> the console.
> The problem here is that another earlier commit (5.13):
>
> a358f40600b3 ("once: implement DO_ONCE_LITE for non-fast-path "do once" functionality")
>
> Modifies all the pr_*_once() calls to always return true claiming
> that no caller is ever checking the return value of the functions.
>
> This is why we are seeing the callstack printed without the
> associated printk() msg.
Extract the ONCE_IF(cond) part into __ONCE_LTE_IF() and use that to
implement DO_ONCE_LITE_IF() and fix the extable code.
Fixes: a358f40600b3 ("once: implement DO_ONCE_LITE for non-fast-path "do once" functionality")
Reported-by: Stephane Eranian <eranian@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Tested-by: Stephane Eranian <eranian@google.com>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/YqyVFsbviKjVGGZ9@worktop.programming.kicks-ass.net
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
show more ...
|
|
Revision tags: v5.15.48, v5.15.47, v5.15.46, v5.15.45, v5.15.44, v5.15.43, v5.15.42, v5.18, v5.15.41, v5.15.40, v5.15.39, v5.15.38, v5.15.37, v5.15.36, v5.15.35, v5.15.34, v5.15.33, v5.15.32, v5.15.31, v5.17, v5.15.30, v5.15.29, v5.15.28, v5.15.27, v5.15.26, v5.15.25, v5.15.24, v5.15.23, v5.15.22, v5.15.21, v5.15.20, v5.15.19, v5.15.18, v5.15.17, v5.4.173, v5.15.16, v5.15.15, v5.16, v5.15.10, v5.15.9, v5.15.8, v5.15.7, v5.15.6, v5.15.5, v5.15.4, v5.15.3, v5.15.2, v5.15.1, v5.15, v5.14.14, v5.14.13, v5.14.12, v5.14.11, v5.14.10, v5.14.9, v5.14.8, v5.14.7, v5.14.6, v5.10.67, v5.10.66, v5.14.5, v5.14.4, v5.10.65, v5.14.3, v5.10.64, v5.14.2, v5.10.63, v5.14.1, v5.10.62, v5.14, v5.10.61, v5.10.60, v5.10.53, v5.10.52, v5.10.51, v5.10.50, v5.10.49 |
|
| #
a358f406 |
| 28-Jun-2021 |
Tanner Love <tannerlove@google.com> |
once: implement DO_ONCE_LITE for non-fast-path "do once" functionality
Certain uses of "do once" functionality reside outside of fast path,
and so do not require jump label patching via static keys,
once: implement DO_ONCE_LITE for non-fast-path "do once" functionality
Certain uses of "do once" functionality reside outside of fast path,
and so do not require jump label patching via static keys, making
existing DO_ONCE undesirable in such cases.
Replace uses of __section(".data.once") with DO_ONCE_LITE(_IF)?
This patch changes the return values of xfs_printk_once, printk_once,
and printk_deferred_once. Before, they returned whether the print was
performed, but now, they always return true. This is okay because the
return values of the following macros are entirely ignored throughout
the kernel:
- xfs_printk_once
- xfs_warn_once
- xfs_notice_once
- xfs_info_once
- printk_once
- pr_emerg_once
- pr_alert_once
- pr_crit_once
- pr_err_once
- pr_warn_once
- pr_notice_once
- pr_info_once
- pr_devel_once
- pr_debug_once
- printk_deferred_once
- orc_warn
Changes
v3:
- Expand commit message to explain why changing return values of
xfs_printk_once, printk_once, printk_deferred_once is benign
v2:
- Fix i386 build warnings
Signed-off-by: Tanner Love <tannerlove@google.com>
Acked-by: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>
Acked-by: Mahesh Bandewar <maheshb@google.com>
Acked-by: Steven Rostedt (VMware) <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
show more ...
|