arm64: dts: qcom: msm8916-samsung-gprime/j5: drop incorrect accelerometer interrupt-names #318
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
wonderfulShrineMaidenOfParadise
changed the title
wonderfulShrineMaidenOfParadise
changed the title
wonderfulShrineMaidenOfParadise
changed the title
wonderfulShrineMaidenOfParadise
force-pushed
the
lis2hh12
branch
2 times, most recently
from
4b2fd03
to
f0546f6
Compare
|
The gprime/j5 commits are quite a maze at the moment and hard to maintain, so I would like to avoid merging/squashing in several minor changes. It takes too much time. I would appreciate if you continue trying to upstream those, then we can backport the version that landed upstream and only deal with the remaining downstream changes (display/modem I guess). We can keep this PR open as a reminder. |
wonderfulShrineMaidenOfParadise
changed the base branch from
msm8916/6.4-rc4
to
msm8916/6.5-rc4
wonderfulShrineMaidenOfParadise
force-pushed
the
lis2hh12
branch
from
f0546f6
to
630580f
Compare
wonderfulShrineMaidenOfParadise
changed the base branch from
msm8916/6.5-rc4
to
msm8916/6.5-rc5
wonderfulShrineMaidenOfParadise
changed the title
wonderfulShrineMaidenOfParadise
force-pushed
the
lis2hh12
branch
from
630580f
to
c4efe1e
Compare
wonderfulShrineMaidenOfParadise
changed the base branch from
msm8916/6.5-rc5
to
msm8916/6.5-rc6
…r (v3) v4: drop incorrect accelerometer interrupt-names Signed-off-by: Lin, Meng-Bo <[email protected]>
…r/magnetometer v2: drop incorrect accelerometer interrupt-names Signed-off-by: Lin, Meng-Bo <[email protected]>
wonderfulShrineMaidenOfParadise
force-pushed
the
lis2hh12
branch
from
c4efe1e
to
71e8742
Compare
M0Rf30
pushed a commit
to M0Rf30/linux
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 13, 2024
[ Upstream commit a51cd6b ] In case when is64 == 1 in emit(A64_REV32(is64, dst, dst), ctx) the generated insn reverses byte order for both high and low 32-bit words, resuling in an incorrect swap as indicated by the jit test: [ 9757.262607] test_bpf: msm8916-mainline#312 BSWAP 16: 0x0123456789abcdef -> 0xefcd jited:1 8 PASS [ 9757.264435] test_bpf: msm8916-mainline#313 BSWAP 32: 0x0123456789abcdef -> 0xefcdab89 jited:1 ret 1460850314 != -271733879 (0x5712ce8a != 0xefcdab89)FAIL (1 times) [ 9757.266260] test_bpf: msm8916-mainline#314 BSWAP 64: 0x0123456789abcdef -> 0x67452301 jited:1 8 PASS [ 9757.268000] test_bpf: msm8916-mainline#315 BSWAP 64: 0x0123456789abcdef >> 32 -> 0xefcdab89 jited:1 8 PASS [ 9757.269686] test_bpf: msm8916-mainline#316 BSWAP 16: 0xfedcba9876543210 -> 0x1032 jited:1 8 PASS [ 9757.271380] test_bpf: msm8916-mainline#317 BSWAP 32: 0xfedcba9876543210 -> 0x10325476 jited:1 ret -1460850316 != 271733878 (0xa8ed3174 != 0x10325476)FAIL (1 times) [ 9757.273022] test_bpf: msm8916-mainline#318 BSWAP 64: 0xfedcba9876543210 -> 0x98badcfe jited:1 7 PASS [ 9757.274721] test_bpf: msm8916-mainline#319 BSWAP 64: 0xfedcba9876543210 >> 32 -> 0x10325476 jited:1 9 PASS Fix this by forcing 32bit variant of rev32. Fixes: 1104247 ("bpf, arm64: Support unconditional bswap") Signed-off-by: Artem Savkov <[email protected]> Tested-by: Puranjay Mohan <[email protected]> Acked-by: Puranjay Mohan <[email protected]> Acked-by: Xu Kuohai <[email protected]> Message-ID: <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <[email protected]>
barni2000
pushed a commit
to msm8953-mainline/linux
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 21, 2024
[ Upstream commit 8ecf3c1 ] Recent additions in BPF like cpu v4 instructions, test_bpf module exhibits the following failures: test_bpf: #82 ALU_MOVSX | BPF_B jited:1 ret 2 != 1 (0x2 != 0x1)FAIL (1 times) test_bpf: #83 ALU_MOVSX | BPF_H jited:1 ret 2 != 1 (0x2 != 0x1)FAIL (1 times) test_bpf: #84 ALU64_MOVSX | BPF_B jited:1 ret 2 != 1 (0x2 != 0x1)FAIL (1 times) test_bpf: #85 ALU64_MOVSX | BPF_H jited:1 ret 2 != 1 (0x2 != 0x1)FAIL (1 times) test_bpf: #86 ALU64_MOVSX | BPF_W jited:1 ret 2 != 1 (0x2 != 0x1)FAIL (1 times) test_bpf: #165 ALU_SDIV_X: -6 / 2 = -3 jited:1 ret 2147483645 != -3 (0x7ffffffd != 0xfffffffd)FAIL (1 times) test_bpf: #166 ALU_SDIV_K: -6 / 2 = -3 jited:1 ret 2147483645 != -3 (0x7ffffffd != 0xfffffffd)FAIL (1 times) test_bpf: #169 ALU_SMOD_X: -7 % 2 = -1 jited:1 ret 1 != -1 (0x1 != 0xffffffff)FAIL (1 times) test_bpf: #170 ALU_SMOD_K: -7 % 2 = -1 jited:1 ret 1 != -1 (0x1 != 0xffffffff)FAIL (1 times) test_bpf: #172 ALU64_SMOD_K: -7 % 2 = -1 jited:1 ret 1 != -1 (0x1 != 0xffffffff)FAIL (1 times) test_bpf: msm8916-mainline#313 BSWAP 16: 0x0123456789abcdef -> 0xefcd eBPF filter opcode 00d7 (@2) unsupported jited:0 301 PASS test_bpf: msm8916-mainline#314 BSWAP 32: 0x0123456789abcdef -> 0xefcdab89 eBPF filter opcode 00d7 (@2) unsupported jited:0 555 PASS test_bpf: msm8916-mainline#315 BSWAP 64: 0x0123456789abcdef -> 0x67452301 eBPF filter opcode 00d7 (@2) unsupported jited:0 268 PASS test_bpf: msm8916-mainline#316 BSWAP 64: 0x0123456789abcdef >> 32 -> 0xefcdab89 eBPF filter opcode 00d7 (@2) unsupported jited:0 269 PASS test_bpf: msm8916-mainline#317 BSWAP 16: 0xfedcba9876543210 -> 0x1032 eBPF filter opcode 00d7 (@2) unsupported jited:0 460 PASS test_bpf: msm8916-mainline#318 BSWAP 32: 0xfedcba9876543210 -> 0x10325476 eBPF filter opcode 00d7 (@2) unsupported jited:0 320 PASS test_bpf: msm8916-mainline#319 BSWAP 64: 0xfedcba9876543210 -> 0x98badcfe eBPF filter opcode 00d7 (@2) unsupported jited:0 222 PASS test_bpf: msm8916-mainline#320 BSWAP 64: 0xfedcba9876543210 >> 32 -> 0x10325476 eBPF filter opcode 00d7 (@2) unsupported jited:0 273 PASS test_bpf: msm8916-mainline#344 BPF_LDX_MEMSX | BPF_B eBPF filter opcode 0091 (@5) unsupported jited:0 432 PASS test_bpf: msm8916-mainline#345 BPF_LDX_MEMSX | BPF_H eBPF filter opcode 0089 (@5) unsupported jited:0 381 PASS test_bpf: msm8916-mainline#346 BPF_LDX_MEMSX | BPF_W eBPF filter opcode 0081 (@5) unsupported jited:0 505 PASS test_bpf: torvalds#490 JMP32_JA: Unconditional jump: if (true) return 1 eBPF filter opcode 0006 (@1) unsupported jited:0 261 PASS test_bpf: Summary: 1040 PASSED, 10 FAILED, [924/1038 JIT'ed] Fix them by adding missing processing. Fixes: daabb2b ("bpf/tests: add tests for cpuv4 instructions") Signed-off-by: Christophe Leroy <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Michael Ellerman <[email protected]> Link: https://msgid.link/91de862dda99d170697eb79ffb478678af7e0b27.1709652689.git.christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <[email protected]>
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Preparing for e2015 upstreaming.
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/[email protected]/
Ref: c756d23
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/[email protected]/