On Thu, 6 Feb 2025 at 09:53, WangYuli <wangyuli@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Hi, Greg, > > It's rather unfortunate that currently, almost all Linux distributions > supporting LoongArch are using LTS kernels version v6.6 or older, such as > openEuler and deepin. [1][2] > > If this bugfix isn't merged into linux-stable, then every single distro > kernel team will have to waste time fixing the same darn bug over and > over, even though it's already fixed in later kernels. > > This would really make LTS look like it's failing to serve its intended > purpose. And I'm sure all of us do not want to see something so terrible > happen. > > On Fri, Dec 6, 2024 at 9:04 PM Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > Odd, why doesn't this affect other arches as well using new binutils? I > > hate to have to backport all of this just for one arch, as that feels > > odd. > > Could you help me understand why you expressed that you "hate" to have > to backport something for only one arch? > Given that we've historically done quite a bit of similar backporting for > architectures such as arm, powerpc, and x86...It's not exactly unprecedented. > I just want to grasp the rationale, as it all seems perfectly justified > and necessary. > > Moreover, with all the active and strict code reviews by all developers, > such occurrences are not frequent on LoongArch. You could be not exactly > "always" backporting something like this just for LoongArch, so perhaps > that might make you and your colleagues feel a little less "hate" :-) > > As for your questions on the root cause of the issue and the effectiveness > of this fix, I reckon Xi Ruoyao's explanation and Ard Biesheuvel's > supplementary points have already provided ample details. [3][4][5] > > If, after your feedback, you still have any lingering doubts regarding the > issue itself or the LoongArch architecture, I believe that Xi Ruoyao, > Ard Biesheuvel, and Huacai Chen would all be more than willing to elaborate > further. > > I'm bringing this up because we've encountered concrete issues in the > process of maintaining distributions. Furthermore, as an upstream resource, > linux-stable can help us more effectively drive forward community > development efforts. > Plus, we realize this benefits all Linux community developers just the same. > > Hoping you could spare a moment from your busy schedule to take another look > at this patch series and perhaps reconsider the LTS inclusion of this bugfix. > > [1]. https://gitee.com/openeuler/kernel/blob/openEuler-25.03/Makefile#L3 > [2]. https://github.com/deepin-community/kernel/blob/linux-6.6.y/Makefile#L3 > [3]. https://lore.kernel.org/all/ccb1fa9034b177042db8fcbe7a95a2a5b466dc30.camel@xxxxxxxxxxx/ > [4]. https://lore.kernel.org/all/CAMj1kXEV+HC+2HMLhDaLfAufQLrXRs2J7akMNr1mjejDYc7kdw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx/#t > [5]. https://lore.kernel.org/all/c9a43e5da01ee2215393c0f3c50956171fe660ab.camel@xxxxxxxxxxx/ > You might consider sending a Loongarch-only patch for mainline that adds weak definitions of these symbols, and backport that to -stable once it hits Linus's tree. That way, the weak references are always satisfied, even during the first linker pass.
