On Tue, Jun 23, 2020 at 05:06:26PM +0200, Marco Elver wrote:
> On Tue, 23 Jun 2020 at 15:43, Paul E. McKenney <paul...@kernel.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Jun 23, 2020 at 08:31:15AM +0200, Marco Elver wrote:
> > > On Tue, 23 Jun 2020 at 02:43, Paul E. McKenney <paul...@kernel.org> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hello!
> > > >
> > > > This series provides KCSAN updates:
> > > >
> > > > 1.      Annotate a data race in vm_area_dup(), courtesy of Qian Cai.
> > > >
> > > > 2.      x86/mm/pat: Mark an intentional data race, courtesy of Qian Cai.
> > > >
> > > > 3.      Add ASSERT_EXCLUSIVE_ACCESS() to __list_splice_init_rcu().
> > > >
> > > > 4.      Add test suite, courtesy of Marco Elver.
> > > >
> > > > 5.      locking/osq_lock: Annotate a data race in osq_lock.
> > > >
> > > > 6.      Prefer '__no_kcsan inline' in test, courtesy of Marco Elver.
> > > >
> > > > 7.      Silence -Wmissing-prototypes warning with W=1, courtesy of Qian 
> > > > Cai.
> > > >
> > > > 8.      Rename test.c to selftest.c, courtesy of Marco Elver.
> > > >
> > > > 9.      Remove existing special atomic rules, courtesy of Marco Elver.
> > > >
> > > > 10.     Add jiffies test to test suite, courtesy of Marco Elver.
> > >
> > > Do we want GCC support back for 5.9?
> > >
> > >    https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20200618093118.247375-1-el...@google.com
> > >
> > > I was hoping it could go into 5.9, because it makes a big difference
> > > in terms of usability as it provides more compiler choice. The only
> > > significant change for GCC support is the addition of the checking of
> > > (CC_IS_GCC && (....)).
> >
> > Very good, I will rebase the following into the KCSAN branch for v5.9:
> >
> >         3e490e3 kcsan: Re-add GCC as a supported compiler
> >         03296de kcsan: Simplify compiler flags
> >         d831090 kcsan: Disable branch tracing in core runtime
> >
> > Please let me know if any other adjustments are needed.
> 
> Looks good to me, thank you!

And updated on the "dev" branch of -rcu.

                                                        Thanx, Paul

Reply via email to