On 24.10.25 17:38, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:

On Fri, 2025-10-24 at 16:13 +0100, David Woodhouse wrote:

quoted

On Fri, 2025-10-24 at 16:51 +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:

quoted

On 24.10.25 16:47, David Woodhouse wrote:

quoted

On Thu, 2025-10-23 at 22:06 +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:

quoted

On 15.10.25 10:27, Kevin Brodsky wrote:

quoted

We currently set a TIF flag when scheduling out a task that is in
lazy MMU mode, in order to restore it when the task is scheduled
again.

The generic lazy_mmu layer now tracks whether a task is in lazy MMU
mode in task_struct::lazy_mmu_state. We can therefore check that
state when switching to the new task, instead of using a separate
TIF flag.

Signed-off-by: Kevin Brodsky <redacted>
---

Looks ok to me, but I hope we get some confirmation from x86 / xen
folks.

I know tglx has shouted at me in the past for precisely this reminder,
but you know you can test Xen guests under QEMU/KVM now and don't need
to actually run Xen? Has this been boot tested?

And after that, boot-testing sparc as well? :D

Also not that hard in QEMU, I believe. Although I do have some SPARC
boxes in the shed...

Please have people test kernel changes on SPARC on real hardware. QEMU does not
emulate sun4v, for example, and therefore testing in QEMU does not cover all
of SPARC hardware.

There are plenty of people on the debian-sparc, gentoo-sparc and sparclinux
LKML mailing lists that can test kernel patches for SPARC. If SPARC-relevant
changes need to be tested, please ask there and don't bury such things in a
deeply nested thread in a discussion which doesn't even have SPARC in the
mail subject.

Hi Adrian,

out of curiosity, do people monitor sparclinux@ for changes to actively 
offer testing when required -- like would it be sufficient to CC 
relevant maintainers+list (like done here) and raise in the cover letter 
that some testing help would be appreciated?

-- 
Cheers

David / dhildenb