On 9/4/07, Mike Frysinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 9/2/07, Andi Kleen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Sun, Sep 02, 2007 at 11:15:23AM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > > there is still the ABI issue ... code written in kernel space in pure
> > > asm cannot always be compiled in userspace
On 9/4/07, Mike Frysinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 9/2/07, Andi Kleen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, Sep 02, 2007 at 11:15:23AM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
there is still the ABI issue ... code written in kernel space in pure
asm cannot always be compiled in userspace and work
On 9/2/07, Andi Kleen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 02, 2007 at 11:15:23AM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > there is still the ABI issue ... code written in kernel space in pure
> > asm cannot always be compiled in userspace and work properly/the same
>
> Is that a blackfin weirdness?
On Sat 1 Sep 2007 18:08, Andi Kleen pondered:
> "Mike Frysinger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > is there any sort of standard for testing and integration into
> > mainline ?
>
> Everybody does their own.
That kind of stinks - and seems to be a potential duplication of effort all
over the
On Sat 1 Sep 2007 18:08, Andi Kleen pondered:
Mike Frysinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
is there any sort of standard for testing and integration into
mainline ?
Everybody does their own.
That kind of stinks - and seems to be a potential duplication of effort all
over the place.
in
On 9/2/07, Andi Kleen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, Sep 02, 2007 at 11:15:23AM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
there is still the ABI issue ... code written in kernel space in pure
asm cannot always be compiled in userspace and work properly/the same
Is that a blackfin weirdness?
yes,
Mike Frysinger wrote:
On 9/1/07, Bill Davidsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
If you want to test that stuff and run it on the current code in the
kernel, how about a kernel module? You could "modprobe sanitytest" or
something and report to syslog at module load time. And maybe have a
parameter
Mike Frysinger wrote:
On 9/1/07, Bill Davidsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If you want to test that stuff and run it on the current code in the
kernel, how about a kernel module? You could modprobe sanitytest or
something and report to syslog at module load time. And maybe have a
parameter
On 9/2/07, Andi Kleen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The other issue to test some of them properly you need unmapped pages
> etc. That gets much easier to do in user space. There are some other
> issues.
vmalloc, vmap, etc. always put a guard page after the allocation. So
if you test string
On Sun, Sep 02, 2007 at 11:15:23AM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> there is still the ABI issue ... code written in kernel space in pure
> asm cannot always be compiled in userspace and work properly/the same
Is that a blackfin weirdness?
>
> > The other issue to test some of them properly you
On 9/2/07, Andi Kleen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 01, 2007 at 06:50:30PM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > On 02 Sep 2007 00:08:57 +0200, Andi Kleen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > BTW string functions are best tested in user space. That's
> > > a relatively bad example.
> >
> > in
On Sat, Sep 01, 2007 at 06:50:30PM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On 02 Sep 2007 00:08:57 +0200, Andi Kleen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > BTW string functions are best tested in user space. That's
> > a relatively bad example.
>
> in theory, maybe ... in reality, i really dont think so
>
> the
On Sat, Sep 01, 2007 at 06:50:30PM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
On 02 Sep 2007 00:08:57 +0200, Andi Kleen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
BTW string functions are best tested in user space. That's
a relatively bad example.
in theory, maybe ... in reality, i really dont think so
the string
On 9/2/07, Andi Kleen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, Sep 01, 2007 at 06:50:30PM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
On 02 Sep 2007 00:08:57 +0200, Andi Kleen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
BTW string functions are best tested in user space. That's
a relatively bad example.
in theory, maybe ...
On Sun, Sep 02, 2007 at 11:15:23AM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
there is still the ABI issue ... code written in kernel space in pure
asm cannot always be compiled in userspace and work properly/the same
Is that a blackfin weirdness?
The other issue to test some of them properly you need
On 9/2/07, Andi Kleen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The other issue to test some of them properly you need unmapped pages
etc. That gets much easier to do in user space. There are some other
issues.
vmalloc, vmap, etc. always put a guard page after the allocation. So
if you test string operations
On 9/1/07, Bill Davidsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If you want to test that stuff and run it on the current code in the
> kernel, how about a kernel module? You could "modprobe sanitytest" or
> something and report to syslog at module load time. And maybe have a
> parameter which does something
Mike Frysinger wrote:
is there any sort of standard for testing and integration into
mainline ? in the Blackfin world, we've been developing little
external kernel modules and adding them to our own testsuite, but
often times these things are not Blackfin specific. case in point,
we're
On 9/1/07, Robin Getz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri 31 Aug 2007 17:22, Mike Frysinger pondered:
> > is there any sort of standard for testing and integration into
> > mainline ? in the Blackfin world, we've been developing little
> > external kernel modules and adding them to our own
On 02 Sep 2007 00:08:57 +0200, Andi Kleen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> BTW string functions are best tested in user space. That's
> a relatively bad example.
in theory, maybe ... in reality, i really dont think so
the string implementations are spread out over the kernel ... there's
"Mike Frysinger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> is there any sort of standard for testing and integration into
> mainline ?
Everybody does their own.
> in the Blackfin world, we've been developing little
> external kernel modules and adding them to our own testsuite, but
> often times these
On Fri 31 Aug 2007 17:22, Mike Frysinger pondered:
> is there any sort of standard for testing and integration into
> mainline ? in the Blackfin world, we've been developing little
> external kernel modules and adding them to our own testsuite, but
> often times these things are not Blackfin
On Fri 31 Aug 2007 17:22, Mike Frysinger pondered:
is there any sort of standard for testing and integration into
mainline ? in the Blackfin world, we've been developing little
external kernel modules and adding them to our own testsuite, but
often times these things are not Blackfin
Mike Frysinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
is there any sort of standard for testing and integration into
mainline ?
Everybody does their own.
in the Blackfin world, we've been developing little
external kernel modules and adding them to our own testsuite, but
often times these things are
On 02 Sep 2007 00:08:57 +0200, Andi Kleen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
BTW string functions are best tested in user space. That's
a relatively bad example.
in theory, maybe ... in reality, i really dont think so
the string implementations are spread out over the kernel ... there's
implementations
On 9/1/07, Robin Getz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri 31 Aug 2007 17:22, Mike Frysinger pondered:
is there any sort of standard for testing and integration into
mainline ? in the Blackfin world, we've been developing little
external kernel modules and adding them to our own testsuite, but
Mike Frysinger wrote:
is there any sort of standard for testing and integration into
mainline ? in the Blackfin world, we've been developing little
external kernel modules and adding them to our own testsuite, but
often times these things are not Blackfin specific. case in point,
we're
On 9/1/07, Bill Davidsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If you want to test that stuff and run it on the current code in the
kernel, how about a kernel module? You could modprobe sanitytest or
something and report to syslog at module load time. And maybe have a
parameter which does something drastic
is there any sort of standard for testing and integration into
mainline ? in the Blackfin world, we've been developing little
external kernel modules and adding them to our own testsuite, but
often times these things are not Blackfin specific. case in point,
we're integrating a string testsuite
is there any sort of standard for testing and integration into
mainline ? in the Blackfin world, we've been developing little
external kernel modules and adding them to our own testsuite, but
often times these things are not Blackfin specific. case in point,
we're integrating a string testsuite
30 matches
Mail list logo
