Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 20 Nov 2023 14:45:56 +0100 | From | Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH printk v2 1/9] printk: ringbuffer: Do not skip non-finalized records with prb_next_seq() |
| |
based on my research this should be the most recent post of this patch. If so then
On 2023-11-06 22:13:22 [+0106], John Ogness wrote: > --- a/kernel/printk/printk_ringbuffer.c > +++ b/kernel/printk/printk_ringbuffer.c > @@ -6,6 +6,7 @@ > @@ -1441,20 +1445,144 @@ bool prb_reserve_in_last(struct prb_reserved_entry *e, struct printk_ringbuffer > return false; > } > > +#ifdef CONFIG_64BIT > + > +#define __u64seq_to_ulseq(u64seq) (u64seq) > +#define __ulseq_to_u64seq(ulseq) (ulseq) > + > +#else /* CONFIG_64BIT */ > + > +static u64 prb_first_seq(struct printk_ringbuffer *rb); > + > +#define __u64seq_to_ulseq(u64seq) ((u32)u64seq) > +static inline u64 __ulseq_to_u64seq(u32 ulseq) > +{ > + u64 rb_first_seq = prb_first_seq(prb); > + u64 seq; > + > + /* > + * The provided sequence is only the lower 32 bits of the ringbuffer > + * sequence. It needs to be expanded to 64bit. Get the first sequence > + * number from the ringbuffer and fold it. > + */ > + seq = rb_first_seq - ((u32)rb_first_seq - ulseq);
This needs to become seq = rb_first_seq - ((s32)((u32)rb_first_seq - ulseq));
in order to continue booting on 32bit. Otherwise, if this survives one cycle then we can deprecate all 32bit platforms. I am happy either way.
Sebastian
| |