Re: [RFC PATCH v4 1/5] glibc: Perform rseq(2) registration at nptl init and thread creation

2018-11-26 Thread Rich Felker
On Mon, Nov 26, 2018 at 05:03:02PM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote: > * Mathieu Desnoyers: > > > So let's make __rseq_abi and __rseq_refcount strong symbols then ? > > Yes, please. (But I'm still not sure we need the reference counter.) The reference counter is needed for out-of-libc

Re: [RFC PATCH v4 1/5] glibc: Perform rseq(2) registration at nptl init and thread creation

2018-11-26 Thread Rich Felker
On Mon, Nov 26, 2018 at 11:30:51AM -0500, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote: > - On Nov 26, 2018, at 10:51 AM, Mathieu Desnoyers > mathieu.desnoy...@efficios.com wrote: > > > - On Nov 26, 2018, at 3:28 AM, Florian Weimer fwei...@redhat.com wrote: > > > >> * Mathieu Desnoyers: > >> > >>> Using a

Re: [RFC PATCH v4 1/5] glibc: Perform rseq(2) registration at nptl init and thread creation

2018-11-23 Thread Rich Felker
On Fri, Nov 23, 2018 at 12:52:21PM -0500, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote: > - On Nov 23, 2018, at 12:30 PM, Rich Felker dal...@libc.org wrote: > > > On Fri, Nov 23, 2018 at 12:05:20PM -0500, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote: > >> - On Nov 23, 2018, at 9:28 AM, Rich Felker

Re: [RFC PATCH v4 1/5] glibc: Perform rseq(2) registration at nptl init and thread creation

2018-11-23 Thread Rich Felker
On Fri, Nov 23, 2018 at 06:39:04PM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote: > * Rich Felker: > > > On Fri, Nov 23, 2018 at 12:05:20PM -0500, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote: > >> There has been presumptions about signals being blocked when the thread > >> exits throughout this email

Re: [RFC PATCH v4 1/5] glibc: Perform rseq(2) registration at nptl init and thread creation

2018-11-23 Thread Rich Felker
On Fri, Nov 23, 2018 at 12:05:20PM -0500, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote: > - On Nov 23, 2018, at 9:28 AM, Rich Felker dal...@libc.org wrote: > [...] > > > > Absolutely. As long as it's in libc, implicit destruction will happen. > > Actually I think the glibc code shound un

Re: [RFC PATCH v4 1/5] glibc: Perform rseq(2) registration at nptl init and thread creation

2018-11-23 Thread Rich Felker
On Fri, Nov 23, 2018 at 02:10:14PM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote: > * Rich Felker: > > >> I'm not entirely sure because the glibc terminology is confusing, but I > >> think it places intial-exec TLS into the static TLS area (so that it has > >> a fixed offset fr

Re: [RFC PATCH v4 1/5] glibc: Perform rseq(2) registration at nptl init and thread creation

2018-11-22 Thread Rich Felker
On Thu, Nov 22, 2018 at 01:35:44PM -0500, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote: > - On Nov 22, 2018, at 11:24 AM, Szabolcs Nagy szabolcs.n...@arm.com wrote: > > > On 22/11/18 15:33, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote: > >> - On Nov 22, 2018, at 10:21 AM, Florian Weimer fwei...@redhat.com > >> wrote: > >>>

Re: [RFC PATCH v4 1/5] glibc: Perform rseq(2) registration at nptl init and thread creation

2018-11-22 Thread Rich Felker
On Thu, Nov 22, 2018 at 05:59:44PM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote: > * Mathieu Desnoyers: > > > - On Nov 22, 2018, at 11:28 AM, Florian Weimer fwei...@redhat.com wrote: > > > >> * Mathieu Desnoyers: > >> > >>> Here is one scenario: we have 2 early adopter libraries using rseq which > >>> are

Re: [RFC PATCH v4 1/5] glibc: Perform rseq(2) registration at nptl init and thread creation

2018-11-22 Thread Rich Felker
On Thu, Nov 22, 2018 at 10:33:19AM -0500, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote: > - On Nov 22, 2018, at 10:21 AM, Florian Weimer fwei...@redhat.com wrote: > > > * Rich Felker: > > > >> On Thu, Nov 22, 2018 at 04:11:45PM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote: > >>> * Mat

Re: [RFC PATCH v4 1/5] glibc: Perform rseq(2) registration at nptl init and thread creation

2018-11-22 Thread Rich Felker
On Thu, Nov 22, 2018 at 04:11:45PM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote: > * Mathieu Desnoyers: > > > Thoughts ? > > > > /* Unregister rseq TLS from kernel. */ > > if (has_rseq && __rseq_unregister_current_thread ()) > > abort(); > > > > advise_stack_range (pd->stackblock, pd->stackblock_size,

Re: [RFC PATCH v4 1/5] glibc: Perform rseq(2) registration at nptl init and thread creation

2018-11-22 Thread Rich Felker
On Thu, Nov 22, 2018 at 10:04:16AM -0500, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote: > - On Nov 22, 2018, at 9:36 AM, Rich Felker dal...@libc.org wrote: > > > On Wed, Nov 21, 2018 at 01:39:32PM -0500, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote: > >> Register rseq(2) TLS for each thread (including

Re: [RFC PATCH v4 1/5] glibc: Perform rseq(2) registration at nptl init and thread creation

2018-11-22 Thread Rich Felker
On Wed, Nov 21, 2018 at 01:39:32PM -0500, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote: > Register rseq(2) TLS for each thread (including main), and unregister > for each thread (excluding main). "rseq" stands for Restartable > Sequences. Maybe I'm missing something obvious, but "unregister" does not seem to be a

Re: RFC: userspace exception fixups

2018-11-07 Thread Rich Felker
On Tue, Nov 06, 2018 at 03:26:16PM -0800, Sean Christopherson wrote: > On Tue, Nov 06, 2018 at 06:17:30PM -0500, Rich Felker wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 06, 2018 at 11:02:11AM -0800, Andy Lutomirski wrote: > > > On Tue, Nov 6, 2018 at 10:41 AM Dave Hansen wrote: > > > &g

Re: RFC: userspace exception fixups

2018-11-06 Thread Rich Felker
On Tue, Nov 06, 2018 at 11:02:11AM -0800, Andy Lutomirski wrote: > On Tue, Nov 6, 2018 at 10:41 AM Dave Hansen wrote: > > > > On 11/6/18 10:20 AM, Andy Lutomirski wrote: > > > I almost feel like the right solution is to call into SGX on its own > > > private stack or maybe even its own private

Re: RFC: userspace exception fixups

2018-11-02 Thread Rich Felker
On Fri, Nov 02, 2018 at 10:16:02AM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote: > On Fri, Nov 2, 2018 at 10:05 AM Jethro Beekman wrote: > > > > On 2018-11-02 10:01, Andy Lutomirski wrote: > > > On Fri, Nov 2, 2018 at 9:56 AM Jethro Beekman wrote: > > >> > > >> On 2018-11-02 09:52, Sean Christopherson wrote: >

Re: RFC: userspace exception fixups

2018-11-01 Thread Rich Felker
On Thu, Nov 01, 2018 at 12:10:35PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 11:52 AM Rich Felker wrote: > > > > There's no need to chain if the handler is specific to the context > > where the fault happens. You just replace the handler with the one > >

Re: RFC: userspace exception fixups

2018-11-01 Thread Rich Felker
On Thu, Nov 01, 2018 at 07:33:33PM +0100, Jann Horn wrote: > > but I'm > > wondering if a more general mechanism would be helpful. > > > > The basic idea would be to allow libc, or maybe even any library, to > > register a handler that gets a chance to act on an exception caused by > > a user

Re: RFC: userspace exception fixups

2018-11-01 Thread Rich Felker
On Thu, Nov 01, 2018 at 10:53:40AM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote: > Hi all- > > The people working on SGX enablement are grappling with a somewhat > annoying issue: the x86 EENTER instruction is used from user code and > can, as part of its normal-ish operation, raise an exception. It is > also

Re: RFC: userspace exception fixups

2018-11-01 Thread Rich Felker
On Thu, Nov 01, 2018 at 07:09:17PM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote: > * Andy Lutomirski: > > > The basic idea would be to allow libc, or maybe even any library, to > > register a handler that gets a chance to act on an exception caused by > > a user instruction before a signal is delivered. As a

Re: futex_cmpxchg_enabled breakage

2018-09-17 Thread Rich Felker
On Sun, Sep 16, 2018 at 03:38:44PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote: > * Rich Felker: > > >> I believe the expected userspace interface is that you probe support > >> with set_robust_list first, and then start using the relevant futex > >> interfaces only if that

Re: futex_cmpxchg_enabled breakage

2018-09-16 Thread Rich Felker
On Sun, Sep 16, 2018 at 02:16:25PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote: > * Rich Felker: > > > I just spent a number of hours helping someone track down a bug that > > looks like it's some kind of futex_cmpxchg_enabled detection error on > > powerpc64 (still not sure of the roo

Re: futex_cmpxchg_enabled breakage

2018-09-15 Thread Rich Felker
On Sat, Sep 15, 2018 at 12:15:54PM -0400, Rich Felker wrote: > On Sat, Sep 15, 2018 at 05:34:24PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > On Thu, 30 Aug 2018, Rich Felker wrote: > > > On Thu, Aug 30, 2018 at 11:19:58AM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > > > On Wed,

Re: futex_cmpxchg_enabled breakage

2018-09-15 Thread Rich Felker
On Sat, Sep 15, 2018 at 05:34:24PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > On Thu, 30 Aug 2018, Rich Felker wrote: > > On Thu, Aug 30, 2018 at 11:19:58AM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > > On Wed, 29 Aug 2018, Rich Felker wrote: > > > > > > > I just spent a num

Re: futex_cmpxchg_enabled breakage

2018-08-30 Thread Rich Felker
On Thu, Aug 30, 2018 at 11:19:58AM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > On Wed, 29 Aug 2018, Rich Felker wrote: > > > I just spent a number of hours helping someone track down a bug that > > looks like it's some kind of futex_cmpxchg_enabled detection error on > > powerpc64 (st

futex_cmpxchg_enabled breakage

2018-08-29 Thread Rich Felker
I just spent a number of hours helping someone track down a bug that looks like it's some kind of futex_cmpxchg_enabled detection error on powerpc64 (still not sure of the root cause; set_robust_list producing -ENOSYS), and a while back I hit the same problem on sh2 due to lack of EFAULT on nommu,

Re: cpu_no_speculation omissions?

2018-07-26 Thread Rich Felker
On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 04:18:42PM +0200, Joerg Roedel wrote: > On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 03:29:53PM +0200, Jiri Kosina wrote: > > On Mon, 16 Jul 2018, Alan Cox wrote: > > > The pre Silvermont atom cores are in order. When I did the original > > > list I didn't bother with all the 32bit cores as we

Re: cpu_no_speculation omissions?

2018-07-16 Thread Rich Felker
On Mon, Jul 16, 2018 at 09:20:58PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > On Mon, 16 Jul 2018, Alan Cox wrote: > > On Mon, 2018-07-16 at 10:28 -0700, Dave Hansen wrote: > > > On 07/16/2018 09:56 AM, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > > > On Mon, 16 Jul 2018, Rich Felker wrote: &g

cpu_no_speculation omissions?

2018-07-16 Thread Rich Felker
At least the Centerton (late-generation Bonnell uarch) Atom family is omitted from the cpu_no_speculation table added by commit fec9434a12f3 to arch/x86/kernel/cpu/common.c. Is this intentional? Would a patch adding it and possibly other omissions be welcome? Rich

Re: [RFC PATCH] UAPI: Document auxvec AT_* namespace policy and note reservations

2018-05-16 Thread Rich Felker
On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 04:09:29PM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > On 05/16/18 08:49, Dave Martin wrote: > > > > Since only contains #defines, it may be enough for arch > > headers to include . > > > > doesn't seem to have any reason to exist at all. If > anyone includes it now, they are

Re: [RFC PATCH] UAPI: Document auxvec AT_* namespace policy and note reservations

2018-05-16 Thread Rich Felker
On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 03:20:47PM +0100, Dave Martin wrote: > There are constraints on defining AT_* auxvec tags that are not > obvious to the casual maintainer of either the global > or the arch-specific headers. This is likely > to lead to mistakes. (I certainly fell foul of it...) > > For

Re: [J-core] [PATCH v5 00/22] sh: LANDISK and R2Dplus convert to device tree

2018-05-14 Thread Rich Felker
On Mon, May 07, 2018 at 10:40:34AM +0900, Yoshinori Sato wrote: > On Thu, 03 May 2018 19:07:38 +0900, > John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote: > > > > [1 ] > > Hi Rich! > > > > On 05/03/2018 04:33 AM, Rich Felker wrote: > > > I found the U-Boot stuff here:

[GIT PULL] arch/sh regression fixes for 4.17

2018-05-11 Thread Rich Felker
and a build failure. Jacopo Mondi (1): sh: mm: Fix unprotected access to struct device Rich Felker (1): sh: fix build failure for J2 cpu with SMP disabled Rob Herring (1): sh: switch to NO_BOOTMEM arch/sh/Kconfig

Re: [PATCH] sh: switch to NO_BOOTMEM

2018-05-11 Thread Rich Felker
On Fri, May 11, 2018 at 10:37:42AM -0500, Rob Herring wrote: > On Fri, May 11, 2018 at 10:02 AM, Rich Felker <dal...@libc.org> wrote: > > On Fri, May 11, 2018 at 08:45:59AM -0500, Rob Herring wrote: > >> Commit 0fa1c579349f ("of/fdt: use memblock_virt_alloc for ear

Re: [PATCH] sh: switch to NO_BOOTMEM

2018-05-11 Thread Rich Felker
ns before > bootmem is initialized. Swapping the order of bootmem init and > unflattening could also fix this, but removing bootmem is desired. So > enable NO_BOOTMEM on SH like other architectures have done. > > Fixes: 0fa1c579349f ("of/fdt: use memblock_virt_alloc for early alloc")

Re: early alloc change broke sh

2018-05-10 Thread Rich Felker
On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 08:01:28PM -0400, Rich Felker wrote: > Since commit 0fa1c579349fdd90173381712ad78aa99c09d38b (of/fdt: use > memblock_virt_alloc for early alloc), attempting to boot on sh (j2, > nommu) fails with OOM: > > [0.00] bootmem alloc of 7836 bytes failed!

early alloc change broke sh

2018-05-10 Thread Rich Felker
Since commit 0fa1c579349fdd90173381712ad78aa99c09d38b (of/fdt: use memblock_virt_alloc for early alloc), attempting to boot on sh (j2, nommu) fails with OOM: [0.00] bootmem alloc of 7836 bytes failed! [0.00] Kernel panic - not syncing: Out of memory I suspect there are

Re: [J-core] [PATCH v5 00/22] sh: LANDISK and R2Dplus convert to device tree

2018-05-07 Thread Rich Felker
On Mon, May 07, 2018 at 10:28:37AM -0500, Rob Landley wrote: > > > On 05/07/2018 09:45 AM, Rich Felker wrote: > > On Mon, May 07, 2018 at 01:00:17PM +0200, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote: > >> On 05/07/2018 03:40 AM, Yoshinori Sato wrote: > >>>> @Yo

Re: [J-core] [PATCH v5 00/22] sh: LANDISK and R2Dplus convert to device tree

2018-05-07 Thread Rich Felker
On Mon, May 07, 2018 at 10:13:32AM -0500, Rob Landley wrote: > > > On 05/07/2018 09:43 AM, Rich Felker wrote: > > On Mon, May 07, 2018 at 08:40:35AM -0500, Rob Landley wrote: > >> On 05/07/2018 06:00 AM, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote: > >>> I have been abl

Re: [J-core] [PATCH v5 00/22] sh: LANDISK and R2Dplus convert to device tree

2018-05-07 Thread Rich Felker
On Mon, May 07, 2018 at 01:00:17PM +0200, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote: > On 05/07/2018 03:40 AM, Yoshinori Sato wrote: > >>@Yoshinori: > >> > >>Did the HDL-160U LANDISK device you have use u-boot by default or > >>did you convert it from lilo? > > > >Yes. > >Replace sh-lilo's second stage with

Re: [J-core] [PATCH v5 00/22] sh: LANDISK and R2Dplus convert to device tree

2018-05-07 Thread Rich Felker
On Mon, May 07, 2018 at 08:40:35AM -0500, Rob Landley wrote: > On 05/07/2018 06:00 AM, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote: > > I have been able to boot my own kernel on my USL-5P device, but > > I could never get it to detect the IDE controller. Do I need > > an additional patch for that? > > On a

Re: [PATCH v3] sh: mm: Fix unprotected access to struct device

2018-05-05 Thread Rich Felker
On Thu, May 03, 2018 at 09:15:39AM +0200, jacopo mondi wrote: > Hi Christoph, > > On Wed, May 02, 2018 at 05:39:09AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > On Wed, May 02, 2018 at 09:46:31AM +0200, jacopo mondi wrote: > > > Hi again Christoph, > > > > > > The gentle ping actually applies to this

Re: [J-core] [PATCH v5 00/22] sh: LANDISK and R2Dplus convert to device tree

2018-05-03 Thread Rich Felker
On Thu, May 03, 2018 at 12:07:38PM +0200, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote: > Hi Rich! > > On 05/03/2018 04:33 AM, Rich Felker wrote: > >I found the U-Boot stuff here: > > > >https://ja.osdn.net/users/ysato/pf/uboot/wiki/FrontPage > > > >but I'm not sure ho

Re: [J-core] [PATCH v5 00/22] sh: LANDISK and R2Dplus convert to device tree

2018-05-02 Thread Rich Felker
On Wed, May 02, 2018 at 09:37:08PM -0400, Rich Felker wrote: > On Fri, Jan 05, 2018 at 04:28:57PM -0500, Rich Felker wrote: > > On Fri, Nov 17, 2017 at 08:54:47PM +0100, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote: > > > On 11/17/2017 08:17 PM, Rich Felker wrote: > > > > There we

Re: [J-core] [PATCH v5 00/22] sh: LANDISK and R2Dplus convert to device tree

2018-05-02 Thread Rich Felker
On Fri, Jan 05, 2018 at 04:28:57PM -0500, Rich Felker wrote: > On Fri, Nov 17, 2017 at 08:54:47PM +0100, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote: > > On 11/17/2017 08:17 PM, Rich Felker wrote: > > > There were significant problems that I don't think were ever > > > addres

Re: [PATCH 0/3] sh: make early_platform code SuperH-specific

2018-04-30 Thread Rich Felker
On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 06:35:53PM +0200, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote: > I recently started a discussion about the need for a proper early device > probing mechanism[1]. One that would be based on real platform drivers > and support both platform data and device tree. > > While we're far from

Re: [PATCH RFC PoC 0/2] platform: different approach to early platform drivers

2018-04-27 Thread Rich Felker
On Fri, Apr 27, 2018 at 02:40:34PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Fri, Apr 27, 2018 at 1:53 PM, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote: > > 2018-04-27 12:18 GMT+02:00 Arnd Bergmann : > >> On Fri, Apr 27, 2018 at 10:57 AM, Bartosz Golaszewski > >>

Re: [PATCH RFC PoC 0/2] platform: different approach to early platform drivers

2018-04-26 Thread Rich Felker
On Thu, Apr 26, 2018 at 09:28:39PM -0500, David Lechner wrote: > On 04/26/2018 12:31 PM, Rich Felker wrote: > >On Thu, Apr 26, 2018 at 05:29:18PM +0200, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote: > >>From: Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszew...@baylibre.com> > >> > >>This is

Re: [PATCH RFC PoC 0/2] platform: different approach to early platform drivers

2018-04-26 Thread Rich Felker
On Thu, Apr 26, 2018 at 05:29:18PM +0200, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote: > From: Bartosz Golaszewski > > This is a follow to my series[1] the aim of which was to introduce device tree > support for early platform devices. > > It was received rather negatively. Aside from

Re: [PATCH 03/11] platform: make support for early platform devices conditional

2018-04-25 Thread Rich Felker
On Tue, Apr 24, 2018 at 07:30:43PM +0200, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote: > From: Bartosz Golaszewski > > We want to add support for device tree based early platform devices. > > In order not to introduce additional bloat for all users when we extend > struct device to

Re: [PATCH 00/11] platform: device tree support for early platform drivers

2018-04-24 Thread Rich Felker
On Tue, Apr 24, 2018 at 06:55:45PM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote: > Hi bartosz, > > On Tue, Apr 24, 2018 at 07:30:40PM +0200, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote: > > From: Bartosz Golaszewski > > > > Device tree based systems often use OF_DECLARE() macros for devices > > that need

Re: [PATCH 00/11] platform: device tree support for early platform drivers

2018-04-24 Thread Rich Felker
On Tue, Apr 24, 2018 at 07:30:40PM +0200, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote: > From: Bartosz Golaszewski > > Device tree based systems often use OF_DECLARE() macros for devices > that need to be initialized early in the boot process such as clocks, > timers etc. However

Re: [PATCH 4/4] sh: remove board_time_init() callback

2018-04-20 Thread Rich Felker
On Fri, Apr 20, 2018 at 11:51:18PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Fri, Apr 20, 2018 at 5:48 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > > @@ -41,8 +39,7 @@ static void __init sh_late_time_init(void) > > > > void __init time_init(void) > > { > > - if (board_time_init) > > -

Re: [PATCH] sh: mm: Fix unprotected access to struct device

2018-04-20 Thread Rich Felker
On Fri, Apr 20, 2018 at 11:59:13AM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > Hi Christoph, > > On Fri, Apr 20, 2018 at 10:31 AM, Christoph Hellwig > wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 03:13:14PM +0200, jacopo mondi wrote: > >> As long as it goes for arch/sh, the only user of

Re: [REVIEW][PATCH 16/22] signal/sh: Use force_sig_fault where appropriate

2018-04-20 Thread Rich Felker
for every time force_sig_info > is called, which makes the calling function clearer. > > Cc: Yoshinori Sato <ys...@users.sourceforge.jp> > Cc: Rich Felker <dal...@libc.org> > Cc: linux...@vger.kernel.org > Signed-off-by: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebied...@xmission.co

[GIT PULL] arch/sh updates for 4.17

2018-04-13 Thread Rich Felker
for bugs in futex, device tree, and userspace breakpoint traps, and for PCI issues on SH7786. Aurelien Jarno (1): sh: fix futex FUTEX_OP_SET op on userspace addresses Rich Felker (2): sh: fix memory corruption of unflattened

Re: [RFC v2 2/2] base: dma-mapping: Postpone page_to_pfn() on mmap()

2018-04-09 Thread Rich Felker
On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 04:06:15PM +0300, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > Hello, > > On Monday, 9 April 2018 14:11:22 EEST Robin Murphy wrote: > > On 09/04/18 08:25, jacopo mondi wrote: > > > Hi Robin, Laurent, > > > > > > a long time passed, sorry about this. > > > > > > On Wed, Nov 15, 2017 at

Re: [RFC PATCH v2 0/2] Randomization of address chosen by mmap.

2018-03-30 Thread Rich Felker
On Fri, Mar 30, 2018 at 09:55:08AM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote: > Hi! > > > Current implementation doesn't randomize address returned by mmap. > > All the entropy ends with choosing mmap_base_addr at the process > > creation. After that mmap build very predictable layout of address > > space. It

Re: [PATCH v5 15/16] sh: Switch to generic free_initrd_mem.

2018-03-29 Thread Rich Felker
id free_initrd_mem(unsigned long start, unsigned long end) > -{ > - free_reserved_area((void *)start, (void *)end, -1, "initrd"); > -} > -#endif > - > #ifdef CONFIG_MEMORY_HOTPLUG > int arch_add_memory(int nid, u64 start, u64 size, struct vmem_altmap *altmap, > bool want_memblock) > -- > 2.16.2 LGTM. Acked-by: Rich Felker <dal...@libc.org>

Re: [PATCH V4 Resend] ZBOOT: fix stack protector in compressed boot phase

2018-03-28 Thread Rich Felker
0a0dff; > -} > +const unsigned long __stack_chk_guard = 0x000a0dff; > > void __stack_chk_fail(void) > { > @@ -130,8 +125,6 @@ void decompress_kernel(void) > { > unsigned long output_addr; > > - __stack_chk_guard_setup(); > - > #ifdef CONFIG_SUPERH64 > output_addr = (CONFIG_MEMORY_START + 0x2000); > #else > -- > 2.7.0 LGTM. Acked-by: Rich Felker <dal...@libc.org> Rich

Re: [RFC PATCH v2 0/2] Randomization of address chosen by mmap.

2018-03-27 Thread Rich Felker
On Tue, Mar 27, 2018 at 06:16:35PM -0400, Theodore Y. Ts'o wrote: > On Tue, Mar 27, 2018 at 04:51:08PM +0300, Ilya Smith wrote: > > > /dev/[u]random is not sufficient? > > > > Using /dev/[u]random makes 3 syscalls - open, read, close. This is a > > performance > > issue. > > You may want to

Re: Regression with arm in next with stack protector

2018-03-27 Thread Rich Felker
On Tue, Mar 27, 2018 at 06:20:27PM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > On Tue, Mar 27, 2018 at 11:35:25AM -0400, Rich Felker wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 27, 2018 at 10:04:10AM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > > > On Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 11:14:53AM -0700, Tony Lindgren

Re: Regression with arm in next with stack protector

2018-03-27 Thread Rich Felker
On Tue, Mar 27, 2018 at 12:34:53PM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > On Tue, Mar 27, 2018 at 10:04:10AM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > > On Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 11:14:53AM -0700, Tony Lindgren wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > > > Looks like commit 5638790dadae ("zboot: fix stack

Re: Regression with arm in next with stack protector

2018-03-27 Thread Rich Felker
On Tue, Mar 27, 2018 at 10:04:10AM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > On Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 11:14:53AM -0700, Tony Lindgren wrote: > > Hi, > > > > Looks like commit 5638790dadae ("zboot: fix stack protector in > > compressed boot phase") breaks booting on arm. > > > > This is all I get

Re: [RFC PATCH v2 0/2] Randomization of address chosen by mmap.

2018-03-23 Thread Rich Felker
On Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 12:29:52PM -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > On Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 03:16:21PM -0400, Rich Felker wrote: > > > Huh, I thought libc was aware of this. Also, I'd expect a libc-based > > > implementation to restrict itself to, eg, only loading libraries in

Re: [RFC PATCH v2 0/2] Randomization of address chosen by mmap.

2018-03-23 Thread Rich Felker
On Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 12:06:18PM -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > On Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 02:00:24PM -0400, Rich Felker wrote: > > On Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 05:48:06AM -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > > > On Thu, Mar 22, 2018 at 07:36:36PM +0300, Ilya Smith wrote: > > &g

Re: [RFC PATCH v2 0/2] Randomization of address chosen by mmap.

2018-03-23 Thread Rich Felker
On Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 05:48:06AM -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > On Thu, Mar 22, 2018 at 07:36:36PM +0300, Ilya Smith wrote: > > Current implementation doesn't randomize address returned by mmap. > > All the entropy ends with choosing mmap_base_addr at the process > > creation. After that mmap

Re: [RFC 2/4] sh: ecovec24: conditionally register backlight device

2018-03-17 Thread Rich Felker
On Sat, Mar 17, 2018 at 07:21:17PM +0900, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote: > > > > On Mar 17, 2018, at 6:25 PM, jacopo mondi wrote: > > > > Hi Dmitry, > > > >> On Fri, Mar 16, 2018 at 04:38:00PM -0700, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > >> Hi Jacopo, > >> > >>> On Fri, Mar 16, 2018

Re: [PATCH V3] ZBOOT: fix stack protector in compressed boot phase

2018-03-16 Thread Rich Felker
On Fri, Mar 16, 2018 at 03:13:37PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Fri, 16 Mar 2018 15:55:16 +0800 Huacai Chen wrote: > > > Call __stack_chk_guard_setup() in decompress_kernel() is too late that > > stack checking always fails for decompress_kernel() itself. So remove > >

Re: [J-core] [PATCH v5 00/22] sh: LANDISK and R2Dplus convert to device tree

2018-01-05 Thread Rich Felker
On Fri, Jan 05, 2018 at 10:47:34PM +0100, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote: > On 01/05/2018 10:28 PM, Rich Felker wrote: > > I'm trying to reproduce this but can't find any documentation for > > cross-LILO in [2], much less any code except possibly the binary > > "lilo.x

Re: [J-core] [PATCH v5 00/22] sh: LANDISK and R2Dplus convert to device tree

2018-01-05 Thread Rich Felker
On Fri, Nov 17, 2017 at 08:54:47PM +0100, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote: > On 11/17/2017 08:17 PM, Rich Felker wrote: > > There were significant problems that I don't think were ever > > addressed, including incompatible changes in how boot command line was > > handled a

Re: [J-core] [PATCH v5 00/22] sh: LANDISK and R2Dplus convert to device tree

2017-11-17 Thread Rich Felker
On Fri, Nov 17, 2017 at 06:49:39PM +0100, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote: > I’ll have a go at this tonight and if the patches still apply fine, I’d just > say go for it. There were significant problems that I don't think were ever addressed, including incompatible changes in how boot command

Re: [musl] Re: [(resend)] seq_file: reset iterator to first record for zero offset

2017-11-09 Thread Rich Felker
On Wed, Nov 08, 2017 at 02:10:05PM +0100, Szabolcs Nagy wrote: > * Miklos Szeredi [2016-12-19 12:38:00 +0100]: > > Al, > > > > Can you please take (or NACK) this patch please? > > > > Thanks, > > Miklos > > --- > > From: Tomasz Majchrzak > > Date:

Re: [musl] Re: [PATCH resent] uapi libc compat: allow non-glibc to opt out of uapi definitions

2017-04-25 Thread Rich Felker
On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 08:29:00AM -0400, Carlos O'Donell wrote: > On 04/25/2017 02:45 AM, Hauke Mehrtens wrote: > > On 03/08/2017 05:39 PM, Carlos O'Donell wrote: > >> Any header needing compat with a libc includes libc-compat.h (per the > >> documented way the model works). With this patch any

Re: [musl] Re: [PATCH v2 0/3] uapi glibc compat: fix musl libc compatibility

2017-04-21 Thread Rich Felker
On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 03:14:21PM +0200, Hauke Mehrtens wrote: > > > On 04/20/2017 10:36 PM, David Miller wrote: > > From: David Woodhouse > > Date: Thu, 20 Apr 2017 21:14:37 +0100 > > > >> I agree, except I don't think you're going far enough. Those "standard > >> names"

Re: [PATCH 1/3] futex: remove duplicated code

2017-03-09 Thread Rich Felker
On Wed, Mar 08, 2017 at 08:36:30PM -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > ,Thomas Gleixner ,Ingo Molnar > ,Chris Zankel ,Max Filippov > ,Arnd Bergmann >

Re: [musl] Re: [PATCH resent] uapi libc compat: allow non-glibc to opt out of uapi definitions

2017-03-08 Thread Rich Felker
On Wed, Mar 08, 2017 at 07:51:29PM -0500, Carlos O'Donell wrote: > On 03/08/2017 07:14 PM, Szabolcs Nagy wrote: > > * Carlos O'Donell [2017-03-08 10:53:00 -0500]: > >> On 11/11/2016 07:08 AM, Felix Janda wrote: > >>> fixes the following compiler errors when is included > >>>

Re: [musl] Re: [PATCH resent] uapi libc compat: allow non-glibc to opt out of uapi definitions

2017-03-08 Thread Rich Felker
On Wed, Mar 08, 2017 at 10:53:00AM -0500, Carlos O'Donell wrote: > On 11/11/2016 07:08 AM, Felix Janda wrote: > > Currently, libc-compat.h detects inclusion of specific glibc headers, > > and defines corresponding _UAPI_DEF_* macros, which in turn are used in > > uapi headers to prevent definition

Re: [PATCH 1/3] futex: remove duplicated code

2017-03-05 Thread Rich Felker
On Fri, Mar 03, 2017 at 01:27:10PM +0100, Jiri Slaby wrote: > There is code duplicated over all architecture's headers for > futex_atomic_op_inuser. Namely op decoding, access_ok check for uaddr, > and comparison of the result. > > Remove this duplication and leave up to the arches only the

Re: linux-next: error fetching the sh tree

2017-01-09 Thread Rich Felker
On Mon, Jan 09, 2017 at 09:25:21AM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi All, > > Fetching the sh tree (git://git.libc.org/linux-sh#for-next) fails because > the name servers for libc.org are not available (that means that Rich > probably won't get this email directly). > > > I am hoping someone

Re: [kernel-hardening] [PATCH 3/4] Make static usermode helper binaries constant

2016-12-14 Thread Rich Felker
On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 10:50:52AM -0800, Greg KH wrote: > > There are a number of usermode helper binaries that are "hard coded" in > the kernel today, so mark them as "const" to make it harder for someone > to change where the variables point to. You're not preventing change of where they

Re: [PATCH v9 0/2] J-Core timer support

2016-10-20 Thread Rich Felker
On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 07:56:09PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > Daniel, > > On Thu, 20 Oct 2016, Rich Felker wrote: > > On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 09:32:40AM +0200, Daniel Lezcano wrote: > > > Unfortunately it won't happen. v4.9-rc1 is already out. The drive

[tip:timers/urgent] clocksource: Add J-Core timer/clocksource driver

2016-10-20 Thread tip-bot for Rich Felker
Commit-ID: 9995f4f184613fb02ee73092b03545520a72b104 Gitweb: http://git.kernel.org/tip/9995f4f184613fb02ee73092b03545520a72b104 Author: Rich Felker <dal...@libc.org> AuthorDate: Thu, 13 Oct 2016 21:51:06 + Committer: Thomas Gleixner <t...@linutronix.de> CommitDate: Thu, 20

[tip:timers/urgent] of: Add J-Core timer bindings

2016-10-20 Thread tip-bot for Rich Felker
Commit-ID: a2ce092be34c4951e23104a0bfdec08f9577fada Gitweb: http://git.kernel.org/tip/a2ce092be34c4951e23104a0bfdec08f9577fada Author: Rich Felker <dal...@libc.org> AuthorDate: Thu, 13 Oct 2016 21:51:06 + Committer: Thomas Gleixner <t...@linutronix.de> CommitDate: Thu, 20

Re: [PATCH v9 0/2] J-Core timer support

2016-10-20 Thread Rich Felker
On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 09:32:40AM +0200, Daniel Lezcano wrote: > On Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 09:22:25PM -0400, Rich Felker wrote: > > On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 11:30:13AM +0200, Daniel Lezcano wrote: > > > On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 09:51:06PM +, Rich Felker wrote: > > >

[tip:irq/urgent] irqchip/jcore: Don't show Kconfig menu item for driver

2016-10-20 Thread tip-bot for Rich Felker
Commit-ID: 3602ffdee9afa727320d33bda57a6957d72b1df2 Gitweb: http://git.kernel.org/tip/3602ffdee9afa727320d33bda57a6957d72b1df2 Author: Rich Felker <dal...@libc.org> AuthorDate: Wed, 19 Oct 2016 17:53:52 + Committer: Thomas Gleixner <t...@linutronix.de> CommitDate: Thu, 20

Re: [PATCH v9 0/2] J-Core timer support

2016-10-19 Thread Rich Felker
On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 11:30:13AM +0200, Daniel Lezcano wrote: > On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 09:51:06PM +0000, Rich Felker wrote: > > This version of the patch makes the changes requested by Daniel > > Lezcano in review of v8. > > > > Rich Felker (2): > >

[PATCH] irqchip/jcore: don't show Kconfig menu item for driver

2016-10-19 Thread Rich Felker
Core drivers for J-Core SoCs will be selected implicitly via CONFIG_SH_JCORE_SOC instead. Based on a corresponding change to the clocksource/timer driver requested by Daniel Lezcano. Signed-off-by: Rich Felker <dal...@libc.org> --- drivers/irqchip/Kconfig | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 inse

[GIT PULL] arch/sh updates for 4.9

2016-10-19 Thread Rich Felker
. Rich Felker (3): sh: support CPU_J2 when compiler lacks -mj2 sh: add Kconfig option for J-Core SoC core drivers sh: add earlycon support to j2_defconfig arch/sh/Makefile | 2 +- arch/sh/boards/Kconfig | 10 ++ arch

[tip:irq/urgent] irqchip/jcore: Fix lost per-cpu interrupts

2016-10-14 Thread tip-bot for Rich Felker
Commit-ID: c024f06b3de372cd67f86b142992ac88fc3a7d18 Gitweb: http://git.kernel.org/tip/c024f06b3de372cd67f86b142992ac88fc3a7d18 Author: Rich Felker <dal...@libc.org> AuthorDate: Thu, 13 Oct 2016 20:35:30 + Committer: Thomas Gleixner <t...@linutronix.de> CommitDate: Fri, 14

[PATCH v9 1/2] of: add J-Core timer bindings

2016-10-13 Thread Rich Felker
Signed-off-by: Rich Felker <dal...@libc.org> Acked-by: Rob Herring <r...@kernel.org> --- .../devicetree/bindings/timer/jcore,pit.txt| 24 ++ 1 file changed, 24 insertions(+) create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/timer/jcore,pit.txt

[PATCH v9 2/2] clocksource: add J-Core timer/clocksource driver

2016-10-13 Thread Rich Felker
to a full-range 32-bit nanoseconds count. Signed-off-by: Rich Felker <dal...@libc.org> --- drivers/clocksource/Kconfig | 10 ++ drivers/clocksource/Makefile| 1 + drivers/clocksource/jcore-pit.c | 249 include/linux/cpuhotplug.h | 1 +

[PATCH v9 0/2] J-Core timer support

2016-10-13 Thread Rich Felker
This version of the patch makes the changes requested by Daniel Lezcano in review of v8. Rich Felker (2): of: add J-Core timer bindings clocksource: add J-Core timer/clocksource driver .../devicetree/bindings/timer/jcore,pit.txt| 24 ++ drivers/clocksource/Kconfig

[PATCH v3] irqchip/jcore: fix lost per-cpu interrupts

2016-10-13 Thread Rich Felker
the problem, instead of registering handle_simple_irq as the handler, register a wrapper function which checks whether the irq to be handled was requested as per-cpu or not, and passes it to handle_simple_irq or handle_percpu_irq accordingly. Signed-off-by: Rich Felker <dal...@libc.org> ---

Re: [PATCH v8 2/2] clocksource: add J-Core timer/clocksource driver

2016-10-13 Thread Rich Felker
On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 03:25:42PM -0400, Rich Felker wrote: > On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 11:31:26PM +0200, Daniel Lezcano wrote: > > > > --> System Type > > > > > > > > That is what you are looking for, a SUPERH config option selecting all > > > &

Re: [PATCH v8 2/2] clocksource: add J-Core timer/clocksource driver

2016-10-13 Thread Rich Felker
On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 11:31:26PM +0200, Daniel Lezcano wrote: > > > --> System Type > > > > > > That is what you are looking for, a SUPERH config option selecting all the > > > common options and then a JCORE config option adding the different missing > > > bits, namely the CLKSRC_JCORE_PIT. >

Re: [PATCH v8 2/2] clocksource: add J-Core timer/clocksource driver

2016-10-12 Thread Rich Felker
On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 11:31:26PM +0200, Daniel Lezcano wrote: > > > I understand the goal is to have one single configuration and everything > > > DT based and it sounds great but what is missing here is just a subarch, > > > not an option to enable/disable the timer. > > > > > > Give a try

Re: [PATCH] irqchip/jcore: fix lost per-cpu interrupts

2016-10-12 Thread Rich Felker
On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 01:34:17PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 12:35:43PM -0400, Rich Felker wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 10:18:02AM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > > On Tue, 11 Oct 2016, Rich Felker wrote: > > > > On Sun, Oc

Re: [PATCH v8 2/2] clocksource: add J-Core timer/clocksource driver

2016-10-12 Thread Rich Felker
4-bit seconds count and 32-bit nanoseconds > > > > that wrap every second. The driver converts these to a full-range > > > > 32-bit nanoseconds count. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Rich Felker <dal...@libc.org> > > > > --- > > > > driver

Re: [PATCH] irqchip/jcore: fix lost per-cpu interrupts

2016-10-12 Thread Rich Felker
On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 10:18:02AM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > On Tue, 11 Oct 2016, Rich Felker wrote: > > On Sun, Oct 09, 2016 at 09:23:58PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > > On Sun, 9 Oct 2016, Rich Felker wrote: > > > > On Sun, Oct 09, 2016 at 01:03:10P

Re: [PATCH v8 2/2] clocksource: add J-Core timer/clocksource driver

2016-10-11 Thread Rich Felker
On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 08:18:12PM +0200, Daniel Lezcano wrote: > > Hi Rich, > > On Sun, Oct 09, 2016 at 05:34:22AM +, Rich Felker wrote: > > At the hardware level, the J-Core PIT is integrated with the interrupt > > controller, but it is represented a

  1   2   3   4   5   >