Thanks, I missed that we had changed the return value for
check_unaligned_access(). I'll apply this to the next stable update.
Clark
On Mon, Aug 5, 2024 at 11:00 AM Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
<bigeasy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On 2024-08-05 12:58:36 [+0200], To Kroah-Hartman, Greg wrote:
> > I'm sorry. I misunderstood Clark and assumed this is a stable issue. Now
> > that I have the needed pointers, it is a RT-stable issue only.
> > I'm going to drop the stable folks from Cc: and reply with a patch.
> >
>
> Clark, this one, please:
>
> ----->8------
>
> From: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Mon, 5 Aug 2024 12:38:59 +0200
> Subject: [PATCH] riscv: Add return value to check_unaligned_access().
>
> The stable backport of commit c20d36cc2a207 ("riscv: don't probe
> unaligned access speed if already done") added a `return' stament to
> check_unaligned_access(). The return value of the function is `void' but
> the RT tree has the backport of commit 73cf6167ef44c ("RISC-V: Probe
> misaligned access speed in parallel") which changes the return type to
> `int'.
>
> Make the return statement return 0.
>
> Signed-off-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> arch/riscv/kernel/cpufeature.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/riscv/kernel/cpufeature.c b/arch/riscv/kernel/cpufeature.c
> index dd118773e717b..347cdf56f3a15 100644
> --- a/arch/riscv/kernel/cpufeature.c
> +++ b/arch/riscv/kernel/cpufeature.c
> @@ -588,7 +588,7 @@ static int check_unaligned_access(void *param)
>
> /* We are already set since the last check */
> if (per_cpu(misaligned_access_speed, cpu) != RISCV_HWPROBE_MISALIGNED_UNKNOWN)
> - return;
> + return 0;
>
> /* Make an unaligned destination buffer. */
> dst = (void *)((unsigned long)page_address(page) | 0x1);
> --
> 2.45.2
>
> Sebastian
>
