Re: [PATCH] nd_btt: Make BTT lanes preemptible

2023-09-17 Thread Tomas Glozar
čt 14. 9. 2023 v 22:18 odesílatel Ira Weiny napsal: > Is the bug in 1 of 2 places? > > 1) When btt_write_pg()->lock_map() (when the number of lanes is < number >of cpus) and the lane is acquired is called? > > *or* > > 2) When nd_region_acquire_lane() internally trys to take it's lock? > > A c

RE: [PATCH] tracing/user_events: align uaddr on unsigned long alignment

2023-09-17 Thread David Laight
From: Clément Léger > Sent: 14 September 2023 14:11 > > enabler->uaddr can be aligned on 32 or 64 bits. If aligned on 32 bits, > this will result in a misaligned access on 64 bits architectures since > set_bit()/clear_bit() are expecting an unsigned long (aligned) pointer. > On architecture that d

Re: [PATCH v4] tracepoint: add new `tcp:tcp_ca_event` trace event

2023-09-17 Thread Steven Rostedt
On Sun, 17 Sep 2023 22:06:45 +0800 Manjusaka wrote: > Ping to review( The ask was to resend the patches after the merge window. -- Steve

Re: [PATCH] ocfs2: Annotate struct ocfs2_slot_info with __counted_by

2023-09-17 Thread Joseph Qi
On 9/16/23 4:15 AM, Kees Cook wrote: > Prepare for the coming implementation by GCC and Clang of the __counted_by > attribute. Flexible array members annotated with __counted_by can have > their accesses bounds-checked at run-time checking via CONFIG_UBSAN_BOUNDS > (for array indexing) and CONFI

Re: [PATCH] tracing/user_events: align uaddr on unsigned long alignment

2023-09-17 Thread Clément Léger
On 15/09/2023 04:54, Masami Hiramatsu (Google) wrote: > On Thu, 14 Sep 2023 15:11:02 +0200 > Clément Léger wrote: > >> enabler->uaddr can be aligned on 32 or 64 bits. If aligned on 32 bits, >> this will result in a misaligned access on 64 bits architectures since >> set_bit()/clear_bit() are e

Re: [PATCH v4] tracepoint: add new `tcp:tcp_ca_event` trace event

2023-09-17 Thread Manjusaka
On 2023/8/25 21:32, Zheao Li wrote: > Hello > > This the 4th version of the patch, the previous discusstion is here > > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-trace-kernel/20230807183308.9015-1...@manjusaka.me/ > > In this version of the code, here's some different: > > 1. The event name has been chang

Re: [PATCH 2/2] arm64: dts: qcom: msm8939-huawei-kiwi: Add initial device tree

2023-09-17 Thread lukas walter
>Are you sure this is 3620, have you tried wcn3660 and/or wcn3680 ? I am sure. Downstream source [1] and downstream dmesg (wcnss: IRIS Reg: 51120004 which should equal [2]) indicate 3620 (3620A does not exist) [1]: https://github.com/CyanogenMod/android_kernel_huawei_kiwi/blob/cm-14.1/arch/arm/

Re: [PATCH 2/2] arm64: dts: qcom: msm8939-huawei-kiwi: Add initial device tree

2023-09-17 Thread lukas walter
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 >Order of SoB is unusual. Who did what here? I created the dts and they update the model name. So it should be the other way around -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iQIzBAEBCAAdFiEEi1ngOOsyNO1iyMXiY16HCsLx2zUFAmUG/FQACgkQY16HCsLx 2zXbug//cFZNScSBr6k1