Subject: [linuxppc-release] [PATCH 1/2] powerpc, e5500: add networking to
defconfig
Even though support for the p5020's on-chip ethernet is not yet upstream,
it is not appropriate to disable all networking support (including
loopback, unix domain sockets, external ethernet devices, etc) in the
We keep track of the size of the lowest block of memory and call
setup_initial_memory_limit() only after we've parsed them all
Signed-off-by: Benjamin Herrenschmidt b...@kernel.crashing.org
---
arch/powerpc/kernel/prom.c | 15 ++-
1 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 00:25, Nishanth Aravamudan n...@us.ibm.com wrote:
diff --git a/arch/powerpc/platforms/ps3/system-bus.c
b/arch/powerpc/platforms/ps3/system-bus.c
index 23083c3..688141c 100644
--- a/arch/powerpc/platforms/ps3/system-bus.c
+++
Ok, i like the direction here, but i think the ABI should be done differently.
In this patch the ftrace event filter mechanism is used:
* Will Drewry w...@chromium.org wrote:
+static struct seccomp_filter *alloc_seccomp_filter(int syscall_nr,
+
On Wed, 11 May 2011 about 20:58:18 -, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
We keep track of the size of the lowest block of memory and call
setup_initial_memory_limit() only after we've parsed them all
Good, we lose our sensitivity to device node ordering.
diff --git
On Wed, 11 May 2011 about 21:18:11 +0200, Grant Likely wrote:
On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 7:30 AM, Milton Miller milt...@bga.com wrote:
When allocating irqs, wait to clear the IRQ_NOREQUEST flag until the
host map hook has been called.
When freeing irqs, set the IRQ_NOREQUEST flag before
Hi Mattheew,
such oops you can get also with spi.
For such problem helps to compile your kernel with other preemption
model:
- preempt
- standard
- !!! but not voluntary preemption !!!
The other possibility: check your board, may be it has some memory
problems.
Regards
Sergej.
Am Mittwoch,
On 05/11/2011 01:44 PM, Paul Mackerras wrote:
This adds support for KVM running on 64-bit Book 3S processors,
specifically POWER7, in hypervisor mode. Using hypervisor mode means
that the guest can use the processor's supervisor mode. That means
that the guest can execute privileged
Move the smp_rmb after cpu_relax loop in read_seqlock and add
ACCESS_ONCE to make sure the test and return are consistent.
A multi-threaded core in the lab didn't like the update
from 2.6.35 to 2.6.36, to the point it would hang during
boot when multiple threads were active. Bisection showed
Am 11.05.2011 um 12:39 schrieb Paul Mackerras pau...@samba.org:
Commits a5d4f3ad3a (powerpc: Base support for exceptions using
HSRR0/1) and 673b189a2e (powerpc: Always use SPRN_SPRG_HSCRATCH0
when running in HV mode) cause compile and link errors for 32-bit
classic Book 3S processors when
Le jeudi 12 mai 2011 à 04:13 -0500, Milton Miller a écrit :
Move the smp_rmb after cpu_relax loop in read_seqlock and add
ACCESS_ONCE to make sure the test and return are consistent.
A multi-threaded core in the lab didn't like the update
from 2.6.35 to 2.6.36, to the point it would hang
Commit-ID: 5db1256a5131d3b133946fa02ac9770a784e6eb2
Gitweb: http://git.kernel.org/tip/5db1256a5131d3b133946fa02ac9770a784e6eb2
Author: Milton Miller milt...@bga.com
AuthorDate: Thu, 12 May 2011 04:13:54 -0500
Committer: Thomas Gleixner t...@linutronix.de
CommitDate: Thu, 12 May 2011
On Thu, 2011-05-12 at 03:09 -0500, Milton Miller wrote:
On Wed, 11 May 2011 about 20:58:18 -, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
We keep track of the size of the lowest block of memory and call
setup_initial_memory_limit() only after we've parsed them all
Good, we lose our sensitivity to
Hi,
On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 09:48:50AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
1) We already have a specific ABI for this: you can set filters for events
via
an event fd.
Why not extend that mechanism instead and improve *both* your sandboxing
bits and the events code? This new seccomp code
* Kees Cook kees.c...@canonical.com wrote:
Hi,
On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 09:48:50AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
1) We already have a specific ABI for this: you can set filters for events
via
an event fd.
Why not extend that mechanism instead and improve *both* your sandboxing
On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 11:33:00AM +0200, Alexander Graf wrote:
Am 11.05.2011 um 12:39 schrieb Paul Mackerras pau...@samba.org:
diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kvm/book3s_rmhandlers.S
b/arch/powerpc/kvm/book3s_rmhandlers.S
index ae99af6..1a1b344 100644
---
On Thu, 2011-05-12 at 11:33 +0200, Alexander Graf wrote:
Am 11.05.2011 um 12:39 schrieb Paul Mackerras pau...@samba.org:
Commits a5d4f3ad3a (powerpc: Base support for exceptions using
HSRR0/1) and 673b189a2e (powerpc: Always use SPRN_SPRG_HSCRATCH0
when running in HV mode) cause compile
Am 12.05.2011 um 13:16 schrieb Benjamin Herrenschmidt
b...@kernel.crashing.org:
On Thu, 2011-05-12 at 11:33 +0200, Alexander Graf wrote:
Am 11.05.2011 um 12:39 schrieb Paul Mackerras pau...@samba.org:
Commits a5d4f3ad3a (powerpc: Base support for exceptions using
HSRR0/1) and 673b189a2e
On Wed, 11 May 2011, Will Drewry wrote:
+void seccomp_filter_log_failure(int syscall)
+{
+ printk(KERN_INFO
+ %s[%d]: system call %d (%s) blocked at ip:%lx\n,
+ current-comm, task_pid_nr(current), syscall,
+ syscall_nr_to_name(syscall),
On Thu, 12 May 2011, Ingo Molnar wrote:
2) Why should this concept not be made available wider, to allow the
restriction of not just system calls but other security relevant
components
of the kernel as well?
Because the aim of this is to reduce the attack surface of the syscall
On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 09:48:50AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
To restrict execution to system calls.
Two observations:
1) We already have a specific ABI for this: you can set filters for events
via
an event fd.
Why not extend that mechanism instead and improve *both* your
Andrew Morton a...@linux-foundation.org wrote:
The changelog doesn't permit me to determine the importance of this
fix,
so I don't know whether to schedule it for 2.6.39 or for -stable.
Sorry, my fault. This patch is applicable to kernel versions starting
from 2.6.37.
On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 04:13:54AM -0500, Milton Miller wrote:
Move the smp_rmb after cpu_relax loop in read_seqlock and add
ACCESS_ONCE to make sure the test and return are consistent.
A multi-threaded core in the lab didn't like the update
Which core was that?
-Andi
On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 4:37 AM, sergej.stepa...@ids.de wrote:
Hi Mattheew,
such oops you can get also with spi.
For such problem helps to compile your kernel with other preemption
model:
- preempt
- standard
- !!! but not voluntary preemption !!!
Thanks Sergej, indeed I'm currently
On Thu, 12 May 2011 01:11:03 -0500
Li Yang-R58472 r58...@freescale.com wrote:
Subject: [linuxppc-release] [PATCH 1/2] powerpc, e5500: add networking to
defconfig
Even though support for the p5020's on-chip ethernet is not yet upstream,
it is not appropriate to disable all networking support
On Thu, 12 May 2011 10:31:08 -0500
Scott Wood scottw...@freescale.com wrote:
On Thu, 12 May 2011 01:11:03 -0500
Li Yang-R58472 r58...@freescale.com wrote:
diff --git a/arch/powerpc/configs/e55xx_smp_defconfig
b/arch/powerpc/configs/e55xx_smp_defconfig
index 9fa1613..f4c5780 100644
---
* James Morris jmor...@namei.org wrote:
On Thu, 12 May 2011, Ingo Molnar wrote:
2) Why should this concept not be made available wider, to allow the
restriction of not just system calls but other security relevant
components
of the kernel as well?
Because the aim of this
[Thanks to everyone for the continued feedback and insights - I appreciate it!]
On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 8:01 AM, Ingo Molnar mi...@elte.hu wrote:
* James Morris jmor...@namei.org wrote:
On Thu, 12 May 2011, Ingo Molnar wrote:
2) Why should this concept not be made available wider, to allow
So what is the best way to handle this? It appears (based
on the comments of others and my own experience) that there
is no DCR that exists and behaves the way that previous SOCs
behaved to give us the link status? The register above
PECFGn_DLLSTA is actually in the PCIe configuration space so
On Sun, Apr 10, 2011 at 03:04:18AM +0800, wanlong@gmail.com wrote:
Subject: [PATCH] fix build warnings on defconfigs
From: Wanlong Gao wanlong@gmail.com
Change the BT_L2CAP and BT_SCO defconfigs from 'm' to 'y',
since BT_L2CAP and BT_SCO had changed to bool configs.
Enable iSCSI support for a number of cards. We had the base
networking devices enabled but forgot to enable iSCSI.
Signed-off-by: Anton Blanchard an...@samba.org
---
v2: I added the bnx2 iscsi twice.
Index: junk/arch/powerpc/configs/pseries_defconfig
Hello list,
I'm currently attempting to get Linux running on a custom board and have
gotten to the point of trying to get our IDE FlashCard working. I have
ported u-boot and have the flash card working as expected (as in being
able to read and write sectors) so it looks like it is possible to
On Thu, 12 May 2011, Ingo Molnar wrote:
Funnily enough, back then you wrote this:
I'm concerned that we're seeing yet another security scheme being
designed on
the fly, without a well-formed threat model, and without taking into
account
lessons learned from the seemingly
33 matches
Mail list logo
