Re: [PATCH] gcov: use atomic counter updates to fix concurrent access crashes

[Andrew Morton]

On Thu, 9 Apr 2026 10:11:24 +0200 Peter Oberparleiter <oberpar@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> > would be to defer it to 7.2 at this point in the development cycle so
> > that it can have most of a cycle to sit in -next.
> 
> Adding Andrew since he typically integrates GCOV patches via his tree,
> and for input on how to handle this patch.
> 
> To summarize the situation, this patch:
> - is only effective with GCC + GCOV profiling enabled
> - fixes a run-time crash
> - improves overall GCOV coverage data consistency
> - triggers a number of build errors due to side-effects on GCC constant
>   folding and therefore depends on the associated series [1] that fixes
>   these build-errors
> - has a non-zero chance to trigger additional build-time errors, e.g.
>   in similar macros guarded by arch/config symbols not covered by
>   current testing
> 
> Given the last point, I agree with Nathan that this patch would benefit
> from additional test coverage to minimize regression risks, e.g. via a
> cycle in -next.

Great, thanks for preempting lots of dumb akpm questions ;)

Agree, I'll stash this in the post-rc1 pile.