Re: [PATCH v4 2/4] drm: Add API for capturing frame CRCs

Hi Tomeu, On 5 August 2016 at 11:45, Tomeu Vizoso wrote: > +#ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_FS > + spin_lock_init(>crc.lock); > + init_waitqueue_head(>crc.wq); > + crtc->crc.source = kstrdup("auto", GFP_KERNEL); Pedantic: kstrdup() can never fail ? > +#endif >

Re: [PATCH] doc-rst:sphinx-extensions: add metadata parallel-safe

Em Thu, 1 Sep 2016 18:22:09 +0200 Markus Heiser escreveu: > Am 01.09.2016 um 16:29 schrieb Jani Nikula : > > > On Thu, 01 Sep 2016, Jonathan Corbet wrote: > >> On Wed, 24 Aug 2016 15:35:24 +0200 > >> Markus Heiser

Re: [PATCH V4] leds: trigger: Introduce an USB port trigger

On Fri, 2 Sep 2016, Jacek Anaszewski wrote: > >>> I'm pretty sure noone ever planned to have more than 1 trigger > >>> assigned to a single LED. I just realized there will be a problem with > >>> proposed solution: sysfs files conflict. ... > >> Currently we support only triggers dedicated to

Re: [PATCH 12/18] arm64: ilp32: add sys_ilp32.c and a separate table (in entry.S) to use it

On Fri, Sep 02, 2016 at 02:55:34PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Friday, September 2, 2016 6:46:19 PM CEST Bamvor Jian Zhang wrote: > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/uapi/asm/unistd.h > > b/arch/arm64/include/uapi/asm/unistd.h > > index 043d17a..78bea1d 100644 > > ---

Re: [RFC PATCH v2 05/20] x86: Add the Secure Memory Encryption cpu feature

On Mon, Aug 22, 2016 at 05:36:22PM -0500, Tom Lendacky wrote: > Update the cpu features to include identifying and reporting on the > Secure Memory Encryption feature. > > Signed-off-by: Tom Lendacky > --- > arch/x86/include/asm/cpufeature.h|7 +-- >

Re: [PATCH v15 04/13] task_isolation: add initial support

On Fri, Sep 02, 2016 at 10:03:52AM -0400, Chris Metcalf wrote: > Any thoughts on the question of "just re-enter the loop" vs. > schedule_timeout()? schedule_timeout() should only be used for things you do not have control over, like things outside of the machine. If you want to actually block

Re: [PATCH v15 04/13] task_isolation: add initial support

On 9/1/2016 6:06 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote: On Tue, Aug 30, 2016 at 11:32:16AM -0400, Chris Metcalf wrote: On 8/30/2016 3:58 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote: What !? I really don't get this, what are you waiting for? Why is rescheduling making things better. We need to wait for the last dyntick to

Re: [PATCH v15 04/13] task_isolation: add initial support

On 8/30/2016 3:50 PM, Andy Lutomirski wrote: On Tue, Aug 30, 2016 at 12:37 PM, Chris Metcalf wrote: On 8/30/2016 2:43 PM, Andy Lutomirski wrote: What if we did it the other way around: set a percpu flag saying "going quiescent; disallow new deferred work", then finish

Re: [PATCH v15 04/13] task_isolation: add initial support

On Sep 2, 2016 7:04 AM, "Chris Metcalf" wrote: > > On 8/30/2016 3:50 PM, Andy Lutomirski wrote: >> >> On Tue, Aug 30, 2016 at 12:37 PM, Chris Metcalf >> wrote: >>> >>> On 8/30/2016 2:43 PM, Andy Lutomirski wrote: What if we did it the

Re: [PATCH] Fix how CSS files are added to the Sphinx HTML.

On Fri, Sep 2, 2016 at 12:38 AM, Markus Heiser wrote: > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Eric Holscher > > --- > > Documentation/conf.py | 14 -- > > 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/Documentation/conf.py

Re: [PATCH v3 2/5] firmware: annotate thou shalt not request fw on init or probe

On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 10:17:38AM +0200, Gabriel Paubert wrote: > On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 05:45:04PM -0700, mcg...@kernel.org wrote: > > [snip] > > --- > > Documentation/firmware_class/README| 20 > > drivers/base/Kconfig | 2 +- > >

Re: [RFC PATCH v2 07/20] x86: Provide general kernel support for memory encryption

On Mon, Aug 22, 2016 at 05:36:46PM -0500, Tom Lendacky wrote: > Adding general kernel support for memory encryption includes: > - Modify and create some page table macros to include the Secure Memory > Encryption (SME) memory encryption mask > - Update kernel boot support to call an SME routine

Re: [PATCH] doc: ioctl: Add some clarifications to botching-up-ioctls

On Friday, September 2, 2016 3:42:24 PM CEST Laura Abbott wrote: > - The guide currently says to pad the structure to a multiple of > 64-bits. This is not necessary in cases where the structure contains > no 64-bit types. Clarify this concept to avoid unnecessary padding. > - When using __u64

[PATCH] doc: ioctl: Add some clarifications to botching-up-ioctls

- The guide currently says to pad the structure to a multiple of 64-bits. This is not necessary in cases where the structure contains no 64-bit types. Clarify this concept to avoid unnecessary padding. - When using __u64 to hold user pointers, blindly trying to do a cast to a void __user *

[RFC] fs: add userspace critical mounts event support

kernel_read_file_from_path() can try to read a file from the system's filesystem. This is typically done for firmware for instance, which lives in /lib/firmware. One issue with this is that the kernel cannot know for sure when the real final /lib/firmare/ is ready, and even if you use initramfs

Re: [PATCH v2 2/5] firmware: annotate thou shalt not request fw on init or probe

On Thu, Aug 25, 2016 at 09:41:33PM +0200, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: > On Thu, Aug 25, 2016 at 01:05:44PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 10:39 PM, Luis R. Rodriguez > > wrote: > > Some users want a fully running gfx stack 2s after power-on. There's > >

Re: [RFC] fs: add userspace critical mounts event support

On Fri, Sep 2, 2016 at 9:11 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Fri, Sep 2, 2016 at 5:20 PM, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: >> >> Thoughts ? > > I really think this is a horrible hack. > > It's basically the kernel giving up, and relying on user space to

Re: [PATCH 12/18] arm64: ilp32: add sys_ilp32.c and a separate table (in entry.S) to use it

On Friday, September 2, 2016 6:46:19 PM CEST Bamvor Jian Zhang wrote: > diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/uapi/asm/unistd.h > b/arch/arm64/include/uapi/asm/unistd.h > index 043d17a..78bea1d 100644 > --- a/arch/arm64/include/uapi/asm/unistd.h > +++ b/arch/arm64/include/uapi/asm/unistd.h > @@ -16,4

Re: [RFC PATCH v2 01/20] x86: Documentation for AMD Secure Memory Encryption (SME)

On Mon, Aug 22, 2016 at 05:35:39PM -0500, Tom Lendacky wrote: > This patch adds a Documenation entry to decribe the AMD Secure Memory > Encryption (SME) feature. > > Signed-off-by: Tom Lendacky > --- > Documentation/x86/amd-memory-encryption.txt | 35 >

Re: [PATCH] Fix how CSS files are added to the Sphinx HTML.

On Fri, 02 Sep 2016, Eric Holscher wrote: > This uses the proper Sphinx add_stylesheet API for adding style overrides: > > http://www.sphinx-doc.org/en/stable/extdev/appapi.html#sphinx.application.Sphinx.add_stylesheet > > Previously, > if a user had any other `css_files`

Re: [PATCH] Fix how CSS files are added to the Sphinx HTML.

Hi Eric, I'am happy to see you here ;-) Am 02.09.2016 um 02:09 schrieb Eric Holscher : > This uses the proper Sphinx add_stylesheet API for adding style overrides: > > http://www.sphinx-doc.org/en/stable/extdev/appapi.html#sphinx.application.Sphinx.add_stylesheet > >

Re: [RFC2 nowrap: PATCH v7 00/18] ILP32 for ARM64

Base on the off-list discussion, the community care about the performance regression of aarch64 LP64 and aarch32 after ILP32 is merged. Given that there is not big open issue in ILP32 in kernel part, I try to address this concern. It is reasonable that we should run lots of testsuite(such as LKP)

Re: [RFC PATCH v2 03/20] x86: Secure Memory Encryption (SME) build enablement

On Mon, Aug 22, 2016 at 05:35:59PM -0500, Tom Lendacky wrote: > Provide the Kconfig support to build the SME support in the kernel. > > Signed-off-by: Tom Lendacky > --- > arch/x86/Kconfig |9 + > 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+) > > diff --git

Re: [PATCH 12/18] arm64: ilp32: add sys_ilp32.c and a separate table (in entry.S) to use it

Hi, Yury On 08/17/2016 07:46 PM, Yury Norov wrote: > From: Andrew Pinski > [...] > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/sys_ilp32.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/sys_ilp32.c > new file mode 100644 > index 000..10fc0ca > --- /dev/null > +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/sys_ilp32.c > @@ -0,0 +1,86