On Mon, Apr 08, 2019 at 10:45:52AM -0400, Sasha Levin wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 08, 2019 at 04:32:38PM +1000, Michael Neuling wrote:
> > From: Breno Leitao <leitao@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > commit 897bc3df8c5aebb54c32d831f917592e873d0559 upstream.
> >
> > Commit e1c3743e1a20 ("powerpc/tm: Set MSR[TS] just prior to recheckpoint")
> > moved a code block around and this block uses a 'msr' variable outside of
> > the CONFIG_PPC_TRANSACTIONAL_MEM, however the 'msr' variable is declared
> > inside a CONFIG_PPC_TRANSACTIONAL_MEM block, causing a possible error when
> > CONFIG_PPC_TRANSACTION_MEM is not defined.
> >
> > error: 'msr' undeclared (first use in this function)
> >
> > This is not causing a compilation error in the mainline kernel, because
> > 'msr' is being used as an argument of MSR_TM_ACTIVE(), which is defined as
> > the following when CONFIG_PPC_TRANSACTIONAL_MEM is *not* set:
> >
> > #define MSR_TM_ACTIVE(x) 0
> >
> > This patch just fixes this issue avoiding the 'msr' variable usage outside
> > the CONFIG_PPC_TRANSACTIONAL_MEM block, avoiding trusting in the
> > MSR_TM_ACTIVE() definition.
> >
> > Cc: stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Reported-by: Christoph Biedl <linux-kernel.bfrz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Fixes: e1c3743e1a20 ("powerpc/tm: Set MSR[TS] just prior to recheckpoint")
> > Signed-off-by: Breno Leitao <leitao@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > Signed-off-by: Michael Ellerman <mpe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Signed-off-by: Michael Neuling <mikey@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > Greg: I think the original patch got rejected with a conflict.
> > This correctly applies to v4.19.34.
>
> Thanks for the backport, I've queued it for 4.9-4.19 since the patch it
> fixes is included in all of those.
Thaks for queueing up all of these while I was away for a week, much
appreciated.
greg k-h
