Re: [PATCH 4/6] mm, arm64: untag user addresses in mm/gup.c

On Wed, May 02, 2018 at 07:25:17PM +0200, Andrey Konovalov wrote: > On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 5:36 PM, Kirill A. Shutemov > wrote: > > On Wed, May 02, 2018 at 02:38:42PM +, Andrey Konovalov wrote: > >> > Does having a tagged address here makes any difference? I

Re: [PATCH 0/6] arm64: untag user pointers passed to the kernel

On Wed, Apr 25, 2018 at 04:45:37PM +0200, Andrey Konovalov wrote: > On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 11:33 AM, Kirill A. Shutemov > wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 08:53:09PM +0200, Andrey Konovalov wrote: > >> arm64 has a feature called Top Byte Ignore, which allows to embed

Re: [PATCH 4/6] mm, arm64: untag user addresses in mm/gup.c

On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 08:53:13PM +0200, Andrey Konovalov wrote: > diff --git a/mm/gup.c b/mm/gup.c > index 76af4cfeaf68..fb375de7d40d 100644 > --- a/mm/gup.c > +++ b/mm/gup.c > @@ -386,6 +386,8 @@ struct page *follow_page_mask(struct vm_area_struct *vma, > struct page *page; > struct

Re: [PATCH 3/6] arm64: untag user addresses in copy_from_user and others

On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 08:53:12PM +0200, Andrey Konovalov wrote: > @@ -238,12 +239,15 @@ static inline void uaccess_enable_not_uao(void) > /* > * Sanitise a uaccess pointer such that it becomes NULL if above the > * current addr_limit. > + * Also untag user pointers that have the top byte

Re: [PATCH v3] arm64: v8.4: Support for new floating point multiplication instructions

On Fri, Jan 05, 2018 at 04:22:24PM +0800, gengdongjiu wrote: > On 2018/1/5 15:57, Greg KH wrote: > > On Fri, Jan 05, 2018 at 09:22:54AM +0800, gengdongjiu wrote: > >> Hi will/catalin > >> > >> On 2017/12/13 18:09, Suzuki K Poulose wrote: > >>> On 13/12/17 10:13, Dongjiu Geng wrote: > ARM v8.4

Re: [PATCH v8 00/20] ILP32 for ARM64

Hi Yury, On Thu, Nov 16, 2017 at 02:11:30PM +0300, Yury Norov wrote: > This is ILP32 patches on top of 4.14 kernel: > https://github.com/norov/linux/commits/ilp32-4.14 > > I tested the series with LTP lite built by Linaro toolchain, and no > regressions found. Thanks. I gave it a try as well

Re: [PATCH v8 00/20] ILP32 for ARM64

On Mon, Sep 04, 2017 at 02:54:50PM +0300, Yury Norov wrote: > This is 4.13-based and next-20170901-based ilp32 patches. > https://github.com/norov/linux/tree/ilp32-4.13 Thanks. I'll mirror it on kernel.org sometime this week after doing some tests (I've been mostly away for the past two weeks).

Re: [PATCH v8 00/20] ILP32 for ARM64

On Mon, Jul 24, 2017 at 02:26:24PM +0300, Yury Norov wrote: > This is the 4.12 and linux-next - based kernel patches: > https://github.com/norov/linux/tree/ilp32-4.12 > https://github.com/norov/linux/tree/ilp32-20170724 I published the 4.12 branch here:

Re: [PATCH v8 00/20] ILP32 for ARM64

Hi Yury, On Mon, Jul 24, 2017 at 02:26:24PM +0300, Yury Norov wrote: > On Fri, Jul 07, 2017 at 06:11:36PM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote: > > On Fri, Jul 07, 2017 at 12:59:02AM +0300, Yury Norov wrote: > > > If so, I would like to ask you to do the first ILP32 community poll &

Re: [PATCH v2] kmemleak: add oom=<disable|ignore> runtime parameter

On Mon, Jul 24, 2017 at 05:16:34PM +0800, shuw...@redhat.com wrote: > When running memory stress tests, kmemleak could be easily disabled in > function create_object as system is out of memory and kmemleak failed to > alloc from object_cache. Since there's no way to enable kmemleak after > it's

Re: [PATCH v8 00/20] ILP32 for ARM64

Hi Yury, Just a quick reply as I'm about to go on holiday for the next two weeks. On Fri, Jul 07, 2017 at 12:59:02AM +0300, Yury Norov wrote: > On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 05:10:36PM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote: > > On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 06:49:43PM +0300, Yury Norov wrote: > >

Re: [PATCH v8 00/20] ILP32 for ARM64

Hi Yury, On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 06:49:43PM +0300, Yury Norov wrote: > This series enables aarch64 with ilp32 mode. Thanks for putting this series together, I do appreciate the effort. There are still some review comments coming in but I'm happy with how the ABI looks now. I did some LTP testing

Re: [PATCH 02/20] 32-bit ABI: introduce ARCH_32BIT_OFF_T config option

On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 02:04:11PM +0300, Yury Norov wrote: > On Thu, Jun 08, 2017 at 04:09:50PM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote: > > On Sun, Jun 04, 2017 at 02:59:51PM +0300, Yury Norov wrote: > > > All new 32-bit architectures should have 64-bit off_t type, but existing > >

Re: [PATCH 05/20] arm64: rename COMPAT to AARCH32_EL0 in Kconfig

On Fri, Jun 09, 2017 at 01:40:59AM +0300, Yury Norov wrote: > On Thu, Jun 08, 2017 at 03:09:12PM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote: > > On Sun, Jun 04, 2017 at 02:59:54PM +0300, Yury Norov wrote: > > > --- a/arch/arm64/Kconfig > > > +++ b/arch/arm64/Kconfig >

Re: [PATCH 19/20] arm64:ilp32: add vdso-ilp32 and use for signal return

On Sun, Jun 04, 2017 at 03:00:08PM +0300, Yury Norov wrote: > From: Philipp Tomsich > > ILP32 VDSO exports following symbols: > __kernel_rt_sigreturn; > __kernel_gettimeofday; > __kernel_clock_gettime; > __kernel_clock_getres. > > What shared object to

Re: [PATCH 02/20] 32-bit ABI: introduce ARCH_32BIT_OFF_T config option

On Sun, Jun 04, 2017 at 02:59:51PM +0300, Yury Norov wrote: > All new 32-bit architectures should have 64-bit off_t type, but existing > architectures has 32-bit ones. > > To handle it, new config option is added to arch/Kconfig that defaults > ARCH_32BIT_OFF_T to be disabled for non-64 bit

Re: [PATCH 13/20] arm64: ilp32: share aarch32 syscall handlers

On Sun, Jun 04, 2017 at 03:00:02PM +0300, Yury Norov wrote: > off_t is passed in register pair just like in aarch32. > In this patch corresponding aarch32 handlers are shared to > ilp32 code. Is the comment here relevant? IOW, do we have any AArch64/ILP32 syscall where off_t is used as an

Re: [PATCH 05/20] arm64: rename COMPAT to AARCH32_EL0 in Kconfig

On Sun, Jun 04, 2017 at 02:59:54PM +0300, Yury Norov wrote: > --- a/arch/arm64/Kconfig > +++ b/arch/arm64/Kconfig > @@ -402,7 +402,7 @@ config ARM64_ERRATUM_834220 > > config ARM64_ERRATUM_845719 > bool "Cortex-A53: 845719: a load might read incorrect data" > - depends on COMPAT > +

Re: [PATCH v7] arm64: Work around Falkor erratum 1003

e reserved > ASID. Yet this will not reduce functionality, since TLB entries incorrectly > tagged with the reserved ASID will never be hit by a later instruction. > > Based on work by Shanker Donthineni <shank...@codeaurora.org> > > Signed-off-by: Christopher Covington <

Re: [PATCH v6] arm64: Work around Falkor erratum 1003

On Tue, Feb 07, 2017 at 07:35:16PM -0500, Christopher Covington wrote: > --- a/arch/arm64/Kconfig > +++ b/arch/arm64/Kconfig > @@ -480,6 +480,18 @@ config CAVIUM_ERRATUM_27456 > > If unsure, say Y. > > +config QCOM_FALKOR_ERRATUM_1003 > + bool "Falkor E1003: Incorrect translation

Re: [PATCH v4 2/4] arm64: Work around Falkor erratum 1003

On Wed, Feb 01, 2017 at 06:34:01PM +, Will Deacon wrote: > On Wed, Feb 01, 2017 at 06:22:44PM +0000, Catalin Marinas wrote: > > On Wed, Feb 01, 2017 at 05:59:48PM +, Will Deacon wrote: > > > On Wed, Feb 01, 2017 at 05:49:34PM +0000, Catalin Marinas wrote: > > > &

Re: [PATCH v4 2/4] arm64: Work around Falkor erratum 1003

On Wed, Feb 01, 2017 at 05:59:48PM +, Will Deacon wrote: > On Wed, Feb 01, 2017 at 05:49:34PM +0000, Catalin Marinas wrote: > > On Wed, Feb 01, 2017 at 05:41:05PM +, Will Deacon wrote: > > > On Wed, Feb 01, 2017 at 05:36:09PM +0000, Catalin Marinas wrote: > > > &

Re: [PATCH v4 2/4] arm64: Work around Falkor erratum 1003

On Wed, Feb 01, 2017 at 05:49:34PM +, Catalin Marinas wrote: > On Wed, Feb 01, 2017 at 05:41:05PM +, Will Deacon wrote: > > On Wed, Feb 01, 2017 at 05:36:09PM +, Catalin Marinas wrote: > > > On Wed, Feb 01, 2017 at 04:33:58PM +, Will Deacon wrote: > > > &

Re: [PATCH v4 2/4] arm64: Work around Falkor erratum 1003

On Wed, Feb 01, 2017 at 05:41:05PM +, Will Deacon wrote: > On Wed, Feb 01, 2017 at 05:36:09PM +0000, Catalin Marinas wrote: > > On Wed, Feb 01, 2017 at 04:33:58PM +, Will Deacon wrote: > > > On Wed, Feb 01, 2017 at 11:29:22AM -0500, Christopher Covington wrote: > >

Re: [PATCH v4 2/4] arm64: Work around Falkor erratum 1003

On Wed, Feb 01, 2017 at 04:33:58PM +, Will Deacon wrote: > On Wed, Feb 01, 2017 at 11:29:22AM -0500, Christopher Covington wrote: > > On 01/31/2017 12:56 PM, Marc Zyngier wrote: > > > Given that all ARMv8 CPUs can support SW_PAN, it is more likely to be > > > enabled than the ARMv8.1 PAN. I'd

Re: [PATCH v3 2/5] arm64: Work around Falkor erratum 1003

On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 06:22:08PM +, Marc Zyngier wrote: > On 11/01/17 18:06, Catalin Marinas wrote: > > On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 09:41:15AM -0500, Christopher Covington wrote: > >> diff --git a/arch/arm64/mm/proc.S b/arch/arm64/mm/proc.S > >> index 32682be..9ee

Re: [PATCH v3 2/5] arm64: Work around Falkor erratum 1003

On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 06:40:52PM +, Mark Rutland wrote: > On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 06:22:08PM +, Marc Zyngier wrote: > > On 11/01/17 18:06, Catalin Marinas wrote: > > > On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 09:41:15AM -0500, Christopher Covington wrote: > > >> diff --git

Re: [PATCH v3 2/5] arm64: Work around Falkor erratum 1003

On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 06:37:39PM +, Mark Rutland wrote: > On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 12:35:55PM -0600, Timur Tabi wrote: > > On 01/11/2017 12:33 PM, Mark Rutland wrote: > > >It'll need to affect all lines since the kconfig column needs to expand > > >by at least one character to fit

Re: [PATCH v3 2/5] arm64: Work around Falkor erratum 1003

Some minor comments below, nothing fundamental (as long as you say the new sequence doesn't have the speculative TLB load problem I mentioned on a previous version). On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 09:41:15AM -0500, Christopher Covington wrote: > diff --git a/Documentation/arm64/silicon-errata.txt >

Re: [PATCH 10/18] arm64: ilp32: introduce binfmt_ilp32.c

On Thu, Dec 22, 2016 at 12:26:40AM +0530, Yury Norov wrote: > On Mon, Dec 05, 2016 at 03:38:01PM +0000, Catalin Marinas wrote: > > On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 11:33:09PM +0300, Yury Norov wrote: > > > binfmt_ilp32.c is needed to handle ILP32 binaries > > > > >

Re: [RFC3 nowrap: PATCH v7 00/18] ILP32 for ARM64

On Sun, Dec 18, 2016 at 12:38:23PM +0530, Yury Norov wrote: > On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 11:32:59PM +0300, Yury Norov wrote: > > This series enables aarch64 with ilp32 mode, and as supporting work, > > introduces ARCH_32BIT_OFF_T configuration option that is enabled for > > existing 32-bit

Re: [PATCH 16/18] arm64: ptrace: handle ptrace_request differently for aarch32 and ilp32

On Fri, Jan 06, 2017 at 02:10:03AM +0530, Yury Norov wrote: > On Wed, Dec 07, 2016 at 09:40:13PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > On Wednesday, December 7, 2016 4:59:13 PM CET Catalin Marinas wrote: > > > On Tue, Dec 06, 2016 at 11:55:08AM +0530, Yury Norov wrote: > > > &

Re: [PATCH 16/18] arm64: ptrace: handle ptrace_request differently for aarch32 and ilp32

On Wed, Dec 07, 2016 at 09:40:13PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Wednesday, December 7, 2016 4:59:13 PM CET Catalin Marinas wrote: > > On Tue, Dec 06, 2016 at 11:55:08AM +0530, Yury Norov wrote: > > > On Mon, Dec 05, 2016 at 04:34:23PM +0000, Catalin Marinas wrote: > >

Re: [PATCH 16/18] arm64: ptrace: handle ptrace_request differently for aarch32 and ilp32

On Tue, Dec 06, 2016 at 11:55:08AM +0530, Yury Norov wrote: > On Mon, Dec 05, 2016 at 04:34:23PM +0000, Catalin Marinas wrote: > > On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 11:33:15PM +0300, Yury Norov wrote: > > > New aarch32 ptrace syscall handler is introduced to avoid run-time > > >

Re: [PATCH 16/18] arm64: ptrace: handle ptrace_request differently for aarch32 and ilp32

On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 11:33:15PM +0300, Yury Norov wrote: > New aarch32 ptrace syscall handler is introduced to avoid run-time > detection of the task type. What's wrong with the run-time detection? If it's just to avoid a negligible overhead, I would rather keep the code simpler by avoiding

Re: [PATCH 14/18] arm64: signal32: move ilp32 and aarch32 common code to separated file

On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 11:33:13PM +0300, Yury Norov wrote: > Signed-off-by: Yury Norov Please add some description, even if it means copying the subject. > --- > arch/arm64/include/asm/signal32.h| 3 + > arch/arm64/include/asm/signal32_common.h | 27

Re: [PATCH 10/18] arm64: ilp32: introduce binfmt_ilp32.c

On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 11:33:09PM +0300, Yury Norov wrote: > binfmt_ilp32.c is needed to handle ILP32 binaries > > Signed-off-by: Yury Norov > Signed-off-by: Bamvor Zhang Jian > --- > arch/arm64/include/asm/elf.h | 6 +++ >

Re: [PATCH 09/18] arm64: introduce binfmt_elf32.c

On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 11:33:08PM +0300, Yury Norov wrote: > As we support more than one compat formats, it looks more reasonable > to not use fs/compat_binfmt.c. Custom binfmt_elf32.c allows to move aarch32 > specific definitions there and make code more maintainable and readable. Can you

Re: ILP32 for ARM64 - testing with lmbench

On Mon, Dec 05, 2016 at 06:16:09PM +0800, Zhangjian (Bamvor) wrote: > Do you have suggestion of next move of upstreaming ILP32? I mentioned the steps a few time before. I'm pasting them again here: 1. Complete the review of the Linux patches and ABI (no merge yet) 2. Review the corresponding

Re: ILP32 for ARM64: testing with glibc testsuite

On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 03:22:26PM +0400, Maxim Kuvyrkov wrote: > Regarding ILP32 runtime, my opinion is that it is acceptable for ILP32 > to have extra failures compared to LP64, since these are not > regressions, but, rather, failures of a new configuration. I disagree with this. We definitely

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

On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 02:54:59PM +0200, Dr. Philipp Tomsich wrote: > On 17 Aug 2016, at 14:48, Yury Norov wrote: > > On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 02:28:50PM +0200, Alexander Graf wrote: > >> On 17 Aug 2016, at 13:46, Yury Norov wrote: > >>> This

Re: [PATCH] Documentation: kprobes: Document jprobes stack copying limitations

ks. > > > > > > jon > > > > Was kind of hoping to see an ack (or critique) from a sparc maintainer. > > So are you saying you don't want the patch applied at this point? To avoid any doubt, for arm64: Acked-by: Catalin Marinas <catalin.mari...@

Re: [PATCH 05/19] arm64: rename COMPAT to AARCH32_EL0 in Kconfig

On Sat, Aug 13, 2016 at 06:17:03PM +0300, Yury Norov wrote: > On Fri, Aug 12, 2016 at 03:36:12PM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote: > > On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 10:29:03PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > > On Thursday, August 11, 2016 5:30:03 PM CEST Catalin Marinas wrote: > > &g

Re: [PATCH 05/19] arm64: rename COMPAT to AARCH32_EL0 in Kconfig

On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 05:16:45PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Thursday, August 11, 2016 3:50:00 PM CEST Catalin Marinas wrote: > > On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 10:53:01AM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > > On Thursday, August 11, 2016 3:35:01 PM CEST Zhangjian (Bamvor) wrote: &g

Re: [PATCH 05/19] arm64: rename COMPAT to AARCH32_EL0 in Kconfig

On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 10:53:01AM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Thursday, August 11, 2016 3:35:01 PM CEST Zhangjian (Bamvor) wrote: > > On 2016/6/18 7:54, Yury Norov wrote: > > > From: Andrew Pinski > > > > > > In this patchset ILP32 ABI support is added. Additionally to

Re: [PATCH 08/10] docs: sphinxify kmemleak.txt and move it to dev-tools

On Mon, Aug 08, 2016 at 05:35:00PM -0600, Jonathan Corbet wrote: > Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.mari...@arm.com> > Signed-off-by: Jonathan Corbet <cor...@lwn.net> > --- > .../{kmemleak.txt => dev-tools/kmemleak.rst} | 93 > -- >

Re: [PATCH] arm64:swiotlb:Enable only when Input size through command line

On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 05:43:40PM +0530, Manjeet Pawar wrote: > From: Rohit Thapliyal > > swiotlb default size of 64M is too big as > default value therefore it is made configurable > through command line through swiotlb_size parameter. > swiotlb allocation shall be

Re: [RESEND PATCH v5 0/1] ARM64: ACPI: Update documentation for latest specification version

On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 08:46:26AM -0600, Al Stone wrote: > On 06/14/2016 03:24 AM, Will Deacon wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 10:13:31AM +0100, Will Deacon wrote: > >> On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 03:41:54PM -0600, Al Stone wrote: > >>> This is a resend only: Ping? Last ping was 26 May; there has

Re: [PATCH 01/23] all: syscall wrappers: add documentation

On Fri, May 27, 2016 at 12:49:11PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Friday, May 27, 2016 10:30:52 AM CEST Catalin Marinas wrote: > > On Fri, May 27, 2016 at 10:42:59AM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > > On Friday, May 27, 2016 8:03:57 AM CEST Heiko Carstens wrote: > &g

Re: [PATCH 01/23] all: syscall wrappers: add documentation

On Fri, May 27, 2016 at 10:42:59AM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Friday, May 27, 2016 8:03:57 AM CEST Heiko Carstens wrote: > > > > > > Cost wise, this seems like it all cancels out in the end, but what > > > > > > do I know? > > > > > > > > > > I think you know something, and I also think

Re: [PATCH 01/23] all: syscall wrappers: add documentation

On Fri, May 27, 2016 at 08:03:57AM +0200, Heiko Carstens wrote: > > > > The cost is pretty trivial though. See kernel/compat_wrapper.o: > > > > COMPAT_SYSCALL_WRAP2(creat, const char __user *, pathname, umode_t, > > > > mode); > > > > 0: a9bf7bfdstp x29, x30, [sp,#-16]! > > > > 4:

Re: [PATCH 01/23] all: syscall wrappers: add documentation

On Thu, May 26, 2016 at 11:48:19PM +0300, Yury Norov wrote: > On Wed, May 25, 2016 at 02:28:21PM -0700, David Miller wrote: > > From: Arnd Bergmann > > Date: Wed, 25 May 2016 23:01:06 +0200 > > > > > On Wednesday, May 25, 2016 1:50:39 PM CEST David Miller wrote: > > >> From: Arnd

Re: [PATCH 01/23] all: syscall wrappers: add documentation

On Thu, May 26, 2016 at 03:50:01PM +0100, Szabolcs Nagy wrote: > On 26/05/16 15:20, Catalin Marinas wrote: > > While writing the above, I realised the current ILP32 patches still miss > > on converting pointers passed from user space (unless I got myself > > confused in macro

Re: [PATCH 20/25] arm64:ilp32: add sys_ilp32.c and a separate table (in entry.S) to use it

On Sat, May 14, 2016 at 06:03:52PM +0300, Yury Norov wrote: > +SYSCALL_DEFINE6(mmap2, unsigned long, addr, unsigned long, len, > + unsigned long, prot, unsigned long, flags, unsigned long, fd, > + unsigned long, pgoff) To avoid the types confusion we could add __SC_WRAP to mmap2 in

Re: [RFC6 PATCH v6 00/21] ILP32 for ARM64

On Fri, May 13, 2016 at 01:51:15PM +0300, Yury Norov wrote: > On Fri, May 13, 2016 at 09:28:03AM +0000, Catalin Marinas wrote: > > The discussion is mainly around whether USER_DS for 32-bit compat apps > > should be the same as USER_DS for native 32-bit apps. Even for native > &g

Re: [RFC6 PATCH v6 00/21] ILP32 for ARM64

On Fri, May 13, 2016 at 04:11:23PM +0800, Zhangjian (Bamvor) wrote: > On 2016/5/12 23:28, Catalin Marinas wrote: > >On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 05:24:57PM +0300, Yury Norov wrote: > >>On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 03:07:35PM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote: > >>>On Thu, May 12,

Re: [RFC6 PATCH v6 00/21] ILP32 for ARM64

On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 05:24:57PM +0300, Yury Norov wrote: > On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 03:07:35PM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote: > > On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 04:44:31PM +0300, Yury Norov wrote: > > > On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 02:35:34PM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote: > > > &

Re: [RFC6 PATCH v6 00/21] ILP32 for ARM64

On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 03:07:35PM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote: > On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 04:44:31PM +0300, Yury Norov wrote: > > On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 02:35:34PM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote: > > > On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 03:20:00AM +0300, Yury Norov wrote: > >

Re: [RFC6 PATCH v6 00/21] ILP32 for ARM64

On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 04:44:31PM +0300, Yury Norov wrote: > On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 02:35:34PM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote: > > On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 03:20:00AM +0300, Yury Norov wrote: > > > I debugged preadv02 and pwritev02 failures and found very weird bug. > > &

Re: [PATCH 20/25] arm64:ilp32: add sys_ilp32.c and a separate table (in entry.S) to use it

On Wed, May 11, 2016 at 09:30:07PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Wednesday 11 May 2016 17:59:01 Catalin Marinas wrote: > > On Wed, May 11, 2016 at 12:55:01PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > > On Wednesday 11 May 2016 11:04:38 Yury Norov wrote: > > > > On Wed, Ma

Re: [PATCH 20/25] arm64:ilp32: add sys_ilp32.c and a separate table (in entry.S) to use it

On Wed, May 11, 2016 at 12:55:01PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Wednesday 11 May 2016 11:04:38 Yury Norov wrote: > > On Wed, May 11, 2016 at 10:04:16AM +0800, Zhangjian (Bamvor) wrote: > > [...] > > > > > >>Ok, I will test the ltp syscall test. > > > >>With this changes, the issue I mentioned

Re: [PATCH 24/25] arm64:ilp32: add vdso-ilp32 and use for signal return

On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 07:30:19PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Friday 29 April 2016 17:01:55 Catalin Marinas wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 06, 2016 at 01:08:46AM +0300, Yury Norov wrote: > > > ILP32 VDSO exports next symbols: > > > __kernel_rt_sigreturn; &

Re: [PATCH 25/25] arm64:ilp32: add ARM64_ILP32 to Kconfig

On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 07:08:55PM +0300, Yury Norov wrote: > On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 05:03:34PM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 06, 2016 at 01:08:47AM +0300, Yury Norov wrote: > > > +config ARM64_ILP32 > > > + bool "Kernel support for ILP3

Re: [PATCH 24/25] arm64:ilp32: add vdso-ilp32 and use for signal return

On Wed, Apr 06, 2016 at 01:08:46AM +0300, Yury Norov wrote: > ILP32 VDSO exports next symbols: > __kernel_rt_sigreturn; > __kernel_gettimeofday; > __kernel_clock_gettime; > __kernel_clock_getres; [...] > +$(obj)/gettimeofday-ilp32.o: $(src)/../vdso/gettimeofday.S > + $(call

Re: [PATCH 20/25] arm64:ilp32: add sys_ilp32.c and a separate table (in entry.S) to use it

On Wed, Apr 06, 2016 at 01:08:42AM +0300, Yury Norov wrote: > +/* Using non-compat syscalls where necessary */ > +#define compat_sys_fadvise64_64sys_fadvise64_64 > +#define compat_sys_fallocate sys_fallocate > +#define compat_sys_ftruncate64 sys_ftruncate > +#define

Re: [PATCH 20/25] arm64:ilp32: add sys_ilp32.c and a separate table (in entry.S) to use it

On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 09:47:40PM +0300, Yury Norov wrote: > On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 09:19:13PM +0300, Yury Norov wrote: > > On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 06:26:56PM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote: > > > On Wed, Apr 06, 2016 at 01:08:42AM +0300, Yury Norov wrote: > > > > -

Re: [PATCH 19/25] arm64: ptrace: handle ptrace_request differently for aarch32 and ilp32

On Sat, Apr 23, 2016 at 12:40:13AM +0300, Yury Norov wrote: > On Fri, Apr 22, 2016 at 06:10:09PM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 06, 2016 at 01:08:41AM +0300, Yury Norov wrote: > > > Here new aarch32 ptrace syscall handler is introsuced to avoid run-time > >

Re: [PATCH 19/25] arm64: ptrace: handle ptrace_request differently for aarch32 and ilp32

On Wed, Apr 06, 2016 at 01:08:41AM +0300, Yury Norov wrote: > Here new aarch32 ptrace syscall handler is introsuced to avoid run-time > detection of the task type. The reason for this patch isn't clear to me. What's wrong with the run-time detection? It's not some performance critical code. --

Re: [PATCH 12/25] arm64: compat: change config dependences to aarch32

On Wed, Apr 06, 2016 at 01:08:34AM +0300, Yury Norov wrote: > From: Bamvor Jian Zhang > > With the patches of ILP32, COMPAT is not equivalent to AARCH32 in EL0. > This patch fix this by updating the dependency from COMPAT to > AARCH32_EL0 for ARMV8_DEPRECATED and

Re: [PATCH 10/25] arm64: rename COMPAT to AARCH32_EL0 in Kconfig

On Thu, Apr 14, 2016 at 11:20:29AM +0800, Zhangjian (Bamvor) wrote: > I suggest we enable AARCH32_EL0 by default explicitly. I am not sure > if it should be a dedicated commit. I am ok if you merge my commit, add We currently enable COMPAT in defconfig. I think we keep the same approach and

Re: [RESEND PATCH v2] ARM64: ACPI: Update documentation for latest specification version

ation on _CCA usage (Harb Abdulhamid) > >-- IORT moved to required from recommended (Hanjun Guo) > >-- Clarify IORT description (Hanjun Guo) > > > > Signed-off-by: Al Stone <al.st...@linaro.org> > > Cc: Catalin Marinas <catali