Re: [lkp-robot] [waitid()] 75f64d68f9: Kernel_panic-not_syncing:Attempted_to_kill_init!exitcode=

On Sun, May 21, 2017 at 3:19 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > Did an "allyesconfig" build on 32-bit x86, and looked at who uses the > 8-byte get_user/put_user cases: I've done more testing. It turns out that quite independently of all these patches, our 32-bit x86

Re: [lkp-robot] [waitid()] 75f64d68f9: Kernel_panic-not_syncing:Attempted_to_kill_init!exitcode=

On Sun, May 21, 2017 at 3:19 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > Did an "allyesconfig" build on 32-bit x86, and looked at who uses the > 8-byte get_user/put_user cases: I've done more testing. It turns out that quite independently of all these patches, our 32-bit x86 code is entirely broken. In

Re: [lkp-robot] [waitid()] 75f64d68f9: Kernel_panic-not_syncing:Attempted_to_kill_init!exitcode=

On Sun, May 21, 2017 at 2:37 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > I'm pretty sure there's a reason we added support for it on x86-32, > because there are structures that use __u64 and fill things one entry > at a time. Did an "allyesconfig" build on 32-bit x86, and looked

Re: [lkp-robot] [waitid()] 75f64d68f9: Kernel_panic-not_syncing:Attempted_to_kill_init!exitcode=

On Sun, May 21, 2017 at 2:37 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > I'm pretty sure there's a reason we added support for it on x86-32, > because there are structures that use __u64 and fill things one entry > at a time. Did an "allyesconfig" build on 32-bit x86, and looked at who uses the 8-byte

Re: [lkp-robot] [waitid()] 75f64d68f9: Kernel_panic-not_syncing:Attempted_to_kill_init!exitcode=

On Sun, May 21, 2017 at 2:14 PM, Al Viro wrote: > > Umm... get_user() for anything larger than long is simply not supported on > a lot of architectures[1]. Do we really want to do that for > unsafe_get_user()? I'm pretty sure there's a reason we added support for it

Re: [lkp-robot] [waitid()] 75f64d68f9: Kernel_panic-not_syncing:Attempted_to_kill_init!exitcode=

On Sun, May 21, 2017 at 2:14 PM, Al Viro wrote: > > Umm... get_user() for anything larger than long is simply not supported on > a lot of architectures[1]. Do we really want to do that for > unsafe_get_user()? I'm pretty sure there's a reason we added support for it on x86-32, because there

Re: [lkp-robot] [waitid()] 75f64d68f9: Kernel_panic-not_syncing:Attempted_to_kill_init!exitcode=

On Sun, May 21, 2017 at 12:35:28PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > > On Sun, 21 May 2017, Al Viro wrote: > > > > fix unsafe_put_user() > > So here's my proposed patch on top of yours to fix unsafe_get_user() with > "long long" arguments, and to clean up the extra-long line you did. > >

Re: [lkp-robot] [waitid()] 75f64d68f9: Kernel_panic-not_syncing:Attempted_to_kill_init!exitcode=

On Sun, May 21, 2017 at 12:35:28PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > > On Sun, 21 May 2017, Al Viro wrote: > > > > fix unsafe_put_user() > > So here's my proposed patch on top of yours to fix unsafe_get_user() with > "long long" arguments, and to clean up the extra-long line you did. > >

Re: [lkp-robot] [waitid()] 75f64d68f9: Kernel_panic-not_syncing:Attempted_to_kill_init!exitcode=

On Sun, 21 May 2017, Al Viro wrote: > > fix unsafe_put_user() So here's my proposed patch on top of yours to fix unsafe_get_user() with "long long" arguments, and to clean up the extra-long line you did. Comments? Linus --- arch/x86/include/asm/uaccess.h | 5 +++-- 1

Re: [lkp-robot] [waitid()] 75f64d68f9: Kernel_panic-not_syncing:Attempted_to_kill_init!exitcode=

On Sun, 21 May 2017, Al Viro wrote: > > fix unsafe_put_user() So here's my proposed patch on top of yours to fix unsafe_get_user() with "long long" arguments, and to clean up the extra-long line you did. Comments? Linus --- arch/x86/include/asm/uaccess.h | 5 +++-- 1

Re: [lkp-robot] [waitid()] 75f64d68f9: Kernel_panic-not_syncing:Attempted_to_kill_init!exitcode=

On Sun, May 21, 2017 at 12:34 AM, Al Viro wrote: > > - __put_user_size((x), (ptr), sizeof(*(ptr)), __pu_err, -EFAULT); > \ > + __put_user_size((__typeof__(*(ptr)))(x), (ptr), sizeof(*(ptr)), > __pu_err, -EFAULT); \ Hmm. Looking more at

Re: [lkp-robot] [waitid()] 75f64d68f9: Kernel_panic-not_syncing:Attempted_to_kill_init!exitcode=

On Sun, May 21, 2017 at 12:34 AM, Al Viro wrote: > > - __put_user_size((x), (ptr), sizeof(*(ptr)), __pu_err, -EFAULT); > \ > + __put_user_size((__typeof__(*(ptr)))(x), (ptr), sizeof(*(ptr)), > __pu_err, -EFAULT); \ Hmm. Looking more at this, the

Re: [lkp-robot] [waitid()] 75f64d68f9: Kernel_panic-not_syncing:Attempted_to_kill_init!exitcode=

On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 02:08:20PM +0800, kernel test robot wrote: > > FYI, we noticed the following commit: > > commit: 75f64d68f9816a1c244b8685f056389b24d97e98 ("waitid(): switch copyout > of siginfo to unsafe_put_user()") > url: >

Re: [lkp-robot] [waitid()] 75f64d68f9: Kernel_panic-not_syncing:Attempted_to_kill_init!exitcode=

On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 02:08:20PM +0800, kernel test robot wrote: > > FYI, we noticed the following commit: > > commit: 75f64d68f9816a1c244b8685f056389b24d97e98 ("waitid(): switch copyout > of siginfo to unsafe_put_user()") > url: >

[lkp-robot] [waitid()] 75f64d68f9: Kernel_panic-not_syncing:Attempted_to_kill_init!exitcode=

FYI, we noticed the following commit: commit: 75f64d68f9816a1c244b8685f056389b24d97e98 ("waitid(): switch copyout of siginfo to unsafe_put_user()") url: https://github.com/0day-ci/linux/commits/Al-Viro/move-compat-wait4-and-waitid-next-to-native-variants/20170516-084127 in testcase: boot on

[lkp-robot] [waitid()] 75f64d68f9: Kernel_panic-not_syncing:Attempted_to_kill_init!exitcode=

FYI, we noticed the following commit: commit: 75f64d68f9816a1c244b8685f056389b24d97e98 ("waitid(): switch copyout of siginfo to unsafe_put_user()") url: https://github.com/0day-ci/linux/commits/Al-Viro/move-compat-wait4-and-waitid-next-to-native-variants/20170516-084127 in testcase: boot on