On Thu, Jul 14, 2022 at 3:29 AM Jason A. Donenfeld <ja...@zx2c4.com> wrote: > > Hi again, > > On Mon, Jul 11, 2022 at 06:45:42PM +0200, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote: > > I've reproduced the problem and determined the root cause. This is a > > generic issue with the mmio get_cycles() implementation before 5.9 on > > no-MMU configs, which was fixed during the 5.9 cycle. I don't believe > > that this is the only thing affected on that .0 kernel, where fixes were > > ostensibly backported. Given the relative age of risc-v, the fact that > > 5.8.0 was broken anyway, and that likely nobody is using this kernel in > > that configuration without applying updates, I'm pretty sure my patch is > > safe to apply. I'd recommend updating the broken kernel in your CI. > > > > Meanwhile, the rng-seed field is part of the DT spec. Holding back the > > (virtual) hardware just because some random dot-zero non-LTS release had > > a quickly fixed bug seems ridiculous, and the way in which progress gets > > held up, hacks accumulate, and generally nothing good gets done. It will > > only hamper security, functionality, and boot speed, while helping no > > real practical case that can't be fixed in a better way. > > > > So I believe you should apply the rng-seed commit so that the RISC-V > > machine honors that DT field. > > > > Regards, > > Jason > > > > Just following up on this... Hoping we can get this into a tree soon.
Yep! Sorry, I have been off sick for the last week. I just updated my test images to a newer kernel, which means this passes my tests Thanks! Applied to riscv-to-apply.next Alistair > > Thanks, > Jason