[GIT PULL] RISC-V Fixes for 6.16-rc1

Fri Jun 13 07:06:09 PDT 2025

On 6/12/25 21:19, Palmer Dabbelt wrote:
> On Tue, 10 Jun 2025 13:13:20 PDT (-0700), Alexandre Ghiti wrote:
>> The following changes since commit 
>> 19272b37aa4f83ca52bdf9c16d5d81bdd1354494:
>>
>>    Linux 6.16-rc1 (2025-06-08 13:44:43 -0700)
>>
>> are available in the Git repository at:
>>
>>    git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/alexghiti/linux 
>> tags/riscv-fixes-6.16-rc1
>>
>> for you to fetch changes up to 0e7815e464847acbe5d9adfb351c68f822bbaa7e:
>>
>>    RISC-V: vDSO: Correct inline assembly constraints in the getrandom 
>> syscall wrapper (2025-06-10 08:43:46 +0000)
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------
>> riscv fixes for 6.16-rc1
>>
>> - A fix for the newly introduced getrandom vdso where clang optimizes 
>> away a register variable which is both an input and an output parameter
>> - Another fix for vdso to prevent an error from llvm-readelf
>> - A fix for the runtime constant support which did not handle the 
>> zero case correctly
>> - A fix for theadvector where we did not save all the vector 
>> registers, only a few of them
>
> This one is exposing some of the workflow issues again: there's 
> duplicate patches in here, and I let it hang out overnight to give 
> linux-next a chance to send the "there's duplicate patches" email and 
> didn't get anything.  I've had issues with gmail eating linux-next 
> messages before, so sorry if I'm just missing them.  So not quite sure 
> what's going on, but I think that's part of the problem.

I don't see duplicate patches though, how do you see them? What causes them?

>
> There's also no "b4 ty"-type messages, which makes it hard to sort out 
> the duplicates manually (or I'm missing them, one of your other 
> messages didn't make patchwork).

I did not setup b4 ty yet, I will.

>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> Note that there are still important pending fixes that need reviews 
>> and tests:
>>
>> - raid6 
>> (https://lore.kernel.org/linux-riscv/[email protected]/T/#t)
>
> I'll just grab the that t0 fix -- I understand it enough to take it 
> without a reproducer, I was going to yesterday but sort of just got 
> tired.  I'll go post on the thread...
>
>> - initialization of vdso static data 
>> (https://lore.kernel.org/linux-riscv/[email protected]/)
>
> There's a v3 with some commentary over here: 
> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-riscv/mhng-FC7E1D2C-D4E1-490E-9363-508518B62FE5@palmerdabbelt-mac/
>
>>
>> So I may come with another PR this week.
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> Alexandre Ghiti (1):
>>        Merge patch "fix riscv runtime constant support"
>>
>> Charles Mirabile (1):
>>        riscv: fix runtime constant support for nommu kernels
>
> This also seems to be based on an arbitrary patch, which is kind of 
> clunky.  It seems like you've got some mix of merging and rebasing 
> going on, which is probably also part of why your PR from the last 
> merge window had the rebase issue?

Ok, I need to address how I merge patches, I guess I should have changed 
the merge base: how do you proceed?

Regarding the previous PR, the problem was that the second PR depended 
on patches that were merged in -rc6 and the first PR was sent on -rc3, 
so what should be done here?

1. As I proposed on irc, rebase for-next on -rc6 and apply both PRs (the 
first was not merged yet) and this is why I rebased the second PR on 
-rc6. I also remember we talked about rebasing for-next on each -rcX, we 
already had the problem where for-next was broken because it was based 
on -rcM and we needed a fix from another tree from -rcN.
2. A back-merge of -rc6 into the second PR based on -rc3? Sounds wrong 
but I'll give it a try just to see how it looks.
3. Other solution?

>
>> Fangrui Song (1):
>>        riscv: vdso: Exclude .rodata from the PT_DYNAMIC segment
>>
>> Han Gao (1):
>>        riscv: vector: Fix context save/restore with xtheadvector
>>
>> Xi Ruoyao (1):
>>        RISC-V: vDSO: Correct inline assembly constraints in the 
>> getrandom syscall wrapper
>>
>>   arch/riscv/include/asm/runtime-const.h  |  2 +-
>>   arch/riscv/include/asm/vdso/getrandom.h |  2 +-
>>   arch/riscv/include/asm/vector.h         | 12 ++++++------
>>   arch/riscv/kernel/vdso/vdso.lds.S       |  2 +-
>>   4 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> linux-riscv mailing list
>> linux-riscv at lists.infradead.org
>> https://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-riscv
>
> So I just rebased this to drop the duplicates.  It's on the tester, 
> should show up soon...
>
> _______________________________________________
> linux-riscv mailing list
> linux-riscv at lists.infradead.org
> https://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-riscv