Re: Proposed change to makesyscalls.sh

2018-08-05 Thread Martin Husemann
On Sun, Aug 05, 2018 at 06:24:25AM +0800, Paul Goyette wrote: > The primary usage for this is for arch/usermode's syscallemu() which > (according to those working on arch/usermode) could be considered > "dangerous" and "should never be autoloaded. Having this change will > allow use of a

Re: Proposed change to makesyscalls.sh

2018-08-05 Thread Paul Goyette
On Sun, 5 Aug 2018, Martin Husemann wrote: On Sun, Aug 05, 2018 at 06:24:25AM +0800, Paul Goyette wrote: The primary usage for this is for arch/usermode's syscallemu() which (according to those working on arch/usermode) could be considered "dangerous" and "should never be autoloaded. Having

Re: Proposed change to makesyscalls.sh

2018-08-05 Thread Martin Husemann
On Sun, Aug 05, 2018 at 09:09:54PM +0800, Paul Goyette wrote: > We could change syscall_establish() to install for both sys_nomodule or > sys_nosys entry points. But then we'd need to remember which value to > restore when syscall_disestablish() is called. Change the API and make

Proposal: rename min/max -> umin/umax

2018-08-05 Thread Taylor R Campbell
I propose we rename libkern's min/max to umin/umax. The names min and max invite general use like MIN and MAX, but these functions truncate their arguments to unsigned first. We also have imin/imax, lmin/lmax, and ulmin/ulmax. This came to my attention while working on a drmkms update, where

Re: Proposal: rename min/max -> umin/umax

2018-08-05 Thread Jason Thorpe
> On Aug 5, 2018, at 9:32 AM, Taylor R Campbell > wrote: > > I propose we rename libkern's min/max to umin/umax. The names min and > max invite general use like MIN and MAX, but these functions truncate > their arguments to unsigned first. We also have imin/imax, lmin/lmax, > and

Re: Proposed change to makesyscalls.sh

2018-08-05 Thread Robert Elz
Date:Mon, 6 Aug 2018 05:07:03 +0800 (+08) From:Paul Goyette Message-ID: | Or we could just leave things alone, and tolerate the "hack" that is | currently being used. Or there could just be a new 1 bit/syscall const data struct that says whether the original

Debugging DRM on a laptop?

2018-08-05 Thread coypu
Hi folks, we're working on a drmkms update. I'm testing it on a Dell XPS 9550. It's a laptop with a Skylake CPU. It has a power button. The power button powers off, not reboot. This means the dmesg buffer gets wiped. No serial console as far as I know. Now it reaches a point where the screen

Re: Proposed change to makesyscalls.sh

2018-08-05 Thread Paul Goyette
On Mon, 6 Aug 2018, Robert Elz wrote: Date:Mon, 6 Aug 2018 05:07:03 +0800 (+08) From:Paul Goyette Message-ID: | Or we could just leave things alone, and tolerate the "hack" that is | currently being used. Or there could just be a new 1 bit/syscall const data

Re: Debugging DRM on a laptop?

2018-08-05 Thread Paul Goyette
On Sun, 5 Aug 2018, co...@sdf.org wrote: Hi folks, we're working on a drmkms update. I'm testing it on a Dell XPS 9550. It's a laptop with a Skylake CPU. It has a power button. The power button powers off, not reboot. This means the dmesg buffer gets wiped. No serial console as far as I know.

Re: Proposed change to makesyscalls.sh

2018-08-05 Thread Robert Elz
Date:Mon, 6 Aug 2018 07:06:42 +0800 (+08) From:Paul Goyette Message-ID: | I looked into using bitstring(3) operations, but since that stuff "lives | in" /usr/include/bitstring.h it wasn't clear if using it in kernel code | would be appropriate. Doesn't matter

re: Debugging DRM on a laptop?

2018-08-05 Thread matthew green
co...@sdf.org writes: > Hi folks, > > we're working on a drmkms update. > I'm testing it on a Dell XPS 9550. It's a laptop with a Skylake CPU. > It has a power button. The power button powers off, not reboot. > This means the dmesg buffer gets wiped. > No serial console as far as I know. > > Now