Re: [uml-devel] [PATCH] um: add dummy ioremap and iounmap functions

2017-05-24 Thread Al Viro
On Wed, May 24, 2017 at 04:00:52PM -0600, Logan Gunthorpe wrote: > The user mode architecture does not provide ioremap or iounmap, and > because of this, the arch won't build when the functions are used in some > core libraries. > > I have designs to use these functions in scatterlist.c where they

Re: [uml-devel] [RFC][PATCH] um: Remove proc command from mconsole

2017-05-21 Thread Al Viro
On Sun, May 21, 2017 at 11:19:03PM +0200, Richard Weinberger wrote: > This feature is another abuser of set_fs(). > Reading proc files from the host side is a debugging feature > with no security checks at all. The path is not sanitized, therefore > any file could be read. ITYM "any file on procfs

Re: [uml-devel] [PATCH] um: Fix get_signal() usage

2016-01-08 Thread Al Viro
On Sat, Jan 09, 2016 at 03:51:25AM +, Al Viro wrote: > On Wed, Nov 18, 2015 at 09:51:43AM +0100, Richard Weinberger wrote: > > If get_signal() returns us a signal to post > > we must not call it again, otherwise the already > > posted signal will be overridden. > >

Re: [uml-devel] [PATCH] um: Fix get_signal() usage

2016-01-08 Thread Al Viro
On Wed, Nov 18, 2015 at 09:51:43AM +0100, Richard Weinberger wrote: > If get_signal() returns us a signal to post > we must not call it again, otherwise the already > posted signal will be overridden. > Before commit a610d6e672d this was the case as we stopped > the while after a successful handle_

Re: [uml-devel] [PATCH] um: Fix pointer cast

2015-12-22 Thread Al Viro
On Tue, Dec 22, 2015 at 09:44:01PM +0100, Mickaël Salaün wrote: > Fix a pointer cast typo introduced in v4.4-rc5 especially visible for > the i386 subarchitecture where it results in a kernel crash. Why the hell bother casting it at all? _Any_ pointer will quietly convert to void *, no typecasts

Re: [uml-devel] [PATCH 2/4] arch/um/os-Linux: Drop UM_ prefix from printk() level specifiers

2012-09-29 Thread Al Viro
On Sat, Sep 29, 2012 at 10:27:44PM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > On Sat, Sep 29, 2012 at 10:10 PM, Joe Perches wrote: > >> @@ -88,7 +88,7 @@ static int do_aio(aio_context_t ctx, enum aio_type type, > >> int fd, char *buf, > >> iocbp->aio_nbytes = sizeof(c); > >> b

Re: [uml-devel] [PATCH/resend/bypass] um: Preinclude include/linux/kern_levels.h

2012-09-25 Thread Al Viro
On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 12:20:55PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > IOW, this part of the patch: > > - c_flags = -Wp,-MD,$(depfile) $(USER_CFLAGS) -include user.h > $(CFLAGS_$(basetarget).o) > + c_flags = -Wp,-MD,$(depfile) $(USER_CFLAGS) -include > $(srctree)/include/linux/kern_levels.h

Re: [uml-devel] [PATCH] um: Cleanup headers files

2012-02-12 Thread Al Viro
On Sun, Feb 12, 2012 at 10:26:06PM +0100, Richard Weinberger wrote: > Am 12.02.2012 22:20, schrieb Al Viro: > >On Sun, Feb 12, 2012 at 10:01:49PM +0100, Richard Weinberger wrote: > >>Am 12.02.2012 21:27, schrieb Al Viro: > >>>>So, I pulled your work and mer

Re: [uml-devel] [PATCH] um: Cleanup headers files

2012-02-12 Thread Al Viro
On Sun, Feb 12, 2012 at 10:01:49PM +0100, Richard Weinberger wrote: > Am 12.02.2012 21:27, schrieb Al Viro: > >>So, I pulled your work and merged it into my shiny new UML tree: > >>git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/rw/uml.git > > > >Hmm... I would real

Re: [uml-devel] [PATCH] um: Cleanup headers files

2012-02-12 Thread Al Viro
On Sat, Feb 04, 2012 at 01:44:42AM +0100, Richard Weinberger wrote: > Am 04.02.2012 01:14, schrieb Al Viro: > > On Sat, Feb 04, 2012 at 12:17:43AM +0100, Richard Weinberger wrote: > >> Many header files can be replaced by generic variants. > > > > Umm... I suspe

Re: [uml-devel] your mail

2012-02-12 Thread Al Viro
On Sun, Feb 12, 2012 at 01:21:10AM +0100, Richard Weinberger wrote: > @@ -343,7 +267,7 @@ static irqreturn_t line_write_interrupt(int irq, void > *data) > { > struct chan *chan = data; > struct line *line = chan->line; > - struct tty_struct *tty = line->tty; > + struct tty_st

Re: [uml-devel] your mail

2012-02-12 Thread Al Viro
On Sun, Feb 12, 2012 at 01:40:47PM +0100, Jiri Slaby wrote: > > Is tty_kref_put() safe in interrupt? Here it seems to be OK, but in other > > callers... More or less at random: drivers/tty/serial/lantiq.c has it > > called from lqasc_rx_int(). It seems to be possible to have it end up > > callin

Re: [uml-devel] your mail

2012-02-11 Thread Al Viro
On Sun, Feb 12, 2012 at 01:21:10AM +0100, Richard Weinberger wrote: Not a full review by any means, but... > +++ b/arch/um/drivers/line.c > @@ -19,19 +19,29 @@ static irqreturn_t line_interrupt(int irq, void *data) > { > struct chan *chan = data; > struct line *line = chan->line; > +

Re: [uml-devel] [PATCH] um: Cleanup headers files

2012-02-03 Thread Al Viro
On Sat, Feb 04, 2012 at 12:17:43AM +0100, Richard Weinberger wrote: > Many header files can be replaced by generic variants. Umm... I suspect that for auxvec.h the right thing is to simply remove it - it's never used on uml builds. FWIW, I've rebased my local queue to current and pushed it to ke

Re: [uml-devel] [PATCH 1/2] um: Use generic io.h

2012-01-30 Thread Al Viro
On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 07:25:52PM +, Al Viro wrote: > While we are at it, param.h and pci.h appear to be candidates for the > same treatment, along with delay.h and auxvec.h. mutex.h as well... > BTW, we probably can kill arch/um/include/asm/asm-offsets.h - everything > in th

Re: [uml-devel] [PATCH 1/2] um: Use generic io.h

2012-01-30 Thread Al Viro
On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 06:23:33PM +, Al Viro wrote: > On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 06:23:53PM +0100, Richard Weinberger wrote: > > There is no need to implement our own basic io functions. > > All we need exists already in asm-generic/io.h > > Then just do > > git

Re: [uml-devel] [PATCH 1/2] um: Use generic io.h

2012-01-30 Thread Al Viro
On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 06:23:53PM +0100, Richard Weinberger wrote: > There is no need to implement our own basic io functions. > All we need exists already in asm-generic/io.h Then just do git rm arch/um/include/asm/io.h echo 'generic-y += io.h' >>arch/um/include/asm/Kbuild git add arch/um/inclu

Re: [uml-devel] [PATCH 8/9] um: fix strrchr problems

2011-08-30 Thread Al Viro
On Tue, Aug 30, 2011 at 12:32:31PM +0200, Richard Weinberger wrote: > defconfig + STATIC_LINK + UML_NET_VDE builds fine for me. > > Toolchain (openSUSE 11.4): > glibc: 2.11.3 > vde2: 2.3.1 > gcc: 4.5.3 > binutils: 2.21.1 > > Is my vde too new? > BTW: Why is only strstr affected, what makes it s

Re: [uml-devel] [PATCH] um: fix strrchr problems

2011-08-30 Thread Al Viro
On Tue, Aug 30, 2011 at 01:04:04PM +0200, Richard Weinberger wrote: > From: Al Viro > > [rich...@nod.at: > Fixes: > /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-linux-gnu/4.4.5/../../../../lib/libc.a(strrchr.o): In > function `rindex': > (.text+0x0): multiple definition of `strrchr

Re: [uml-devel] [PATCH 8/9] um: fix strrchr problems

2011-08-29 Thread Al Viro
On Tue, Aug 30, 2011 at 01:23:31AM +0100, Al Viro wrote: > On Tue, Aug 30, 2011 at 12:25:25AM +0200, Richard Weinberger wrote: > > > I'm building most of the time static. > > Using defconfig and > > CONFIG_STATIC_LINK=y > > it builds fine here (x86_64 and i386

Re: [uml-devel] [PATCH 8/9] um: fix strrchr problems

2011-08-29 Thread Al Viro
On Tue, Aug 30, 2011 at 12:25:25AM +0200, Richard Weinberger wrote: > I'm building most of the time static. > Using defconfig and > CONFIG_STATIC_LINK=y > it builds fine here (x86_64 and i386) 32bit build works, 64bit one breaks with /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-linux-gnu/4.4.5/../../../../lib/libc.a(str

Re: [uml-devel] [PATCH 8/9] um: fix strrchr problems

2011-08-29 Thread Al Viro
On Tue, Aug 30, 2011 at 12:15:59AM +0200, Richard Weinberger wrote: > Am 30.08.2011 00:12, schrieb Al Viro: > >On Mon, Aug 29, 2011 at 11:38:39PM +0200, Richard Weinberger wrote: > >>> > >>>ok, I give up. How does this work? > >> > >>*grrr*, you

Re: [uml-devel] [PATCH 8/9] um: fix strrchr problems

2011-08-29 Thread Al Viro
On Mon, Aug 29, 2011 at 11:38:39PM +0200, Richard Weinberger wrote: > > > >ok, I give up. How does this work? > > *grrr*, you can drop this patch. > To my excuse, I've dropped it already from my queue but after > pulling a second time from Al's git branch it made it again into my > queue and I fo

Re: [uml-devel] [PATCH 8/9] um: fix strrchr problems

2011-08-29 Thread Al Viro
On Mon, Aug 29, 2011 at 02:27:05PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > z:/usr/src/linux-3.1-rc4> grep -r kernel_strrchr . > z:/usr/src/linux-3.1-rc4> > > ok, I give up. How does this work? You are grepping for the wrong thing ;-) It works the same way defines next to it do - both the kernel

Re: [uml-devel] SYSCALL, ptrace and syscall restart breakages (Re: [RFC] weird crap with vdso on uml/i386)

2011-08-23 Thread Al Viro
On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 12:43:28PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 12:41 PM, Al Viro wrote: > > > > And it's not cheap - doing that on each syscall will be unpleasant... > > Frankly, I'd rather stopped telling the uml userland about vdso in

Re: [uml-devel] SYSCALL, ptrace and syscall restart breakages (Re: [RFC] weird crap with vdso on uml/i386)

2011-08-23 Thread Al Viro
On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 12:24:22PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 12:18 PM, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > > > > We could drop that information in a metaregister. ?It's not backward > > compatible, but at least it will be obvious when that information is > > available and not. >

Re: [uml-devel] SYSCALL, ptrace and syscall restart breakages (Re: [RFC] weird crap with vdso on uml/i386)

2011-08-23 Thread Al Viro
On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 06:33:17PM +0100, Al Viro wrote: > * SYSCALL is not terminally broken wrt restarts. My apologies for > misreading what was going on. > * SYSENTER with Linus' patch does work just fine wrt restarts + ptrace > * SYSCALL is losing ptrac

Re: [uml-devel] SYSCALL, ptrace and syscall restart breakages (Re: [RFC] weird crap with vdso on uml/i386)

2011-08-23 Thread Al Viro
On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 09:20:12AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > It's EMULATING A SYSTEM CALL. That original "getregs" value is not > some "user space state". It's the *system call* state that you got > after the system call trapped. Setting it back is an insane operation, > but it would happen t

Re: [uml-devel] SYSCALL, ptrace and syscall restart breakages (Re: [RFC] weird crap with vdso on uml/i386)

2011-08-23 Thread Al Viro
On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 06:58:18PM +0200, Richard Weinberger wrote: > What about this hack/solution? > While booting UML can check whether the host's vDSO contains > a SYSCALL instruction. > If so, UML will not make the host's vDSO available to it's > processes... Note that this is *only* for 32b

Re: [uml-devel] SYSCALL, ptrace and syscall restart breakages (Re: [RFC] weird crap with vdso on uml/i386)

2011-08-23 Thread Al Viro
On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 09:29:29AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > Oh yes. > > System call performance is *important*. And x86 is *important*. > > UML? In comparison, not that important. > > So quite frankly, if this is purely an UML issue (and unless we're > missing something else, that's what

Re: [uml-devel] SYSCALL, ptrace and syscall restart breakages (Re: [RFC] weird crap with vdso on uml/i386)

2011-08-23 Thread Al Viro
On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 09:03:04AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > Suggested fixes: > > - instead of blindly doing SETREGS, just write the result registers > individually like you suggested Not enough. There is also a PITA with signal handlers. There we can't avoid modifying ebp on the way out

Re: [uml-devel] SYSCALL, ptrace and syscall restart breakages (Re: [RFC] weird crap with vdso on uml/i386)

2011-08-23 Thread Al Viro
On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 04:26:08PM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote: > On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 02:15:31AM -0400, Al Viro wrote: > > Almost, but not quite. What happens is: > > * process hits syscall insn > > * it's stopped and tracer (guest kernel) does GETREGS > &

Re: [uml-devel] SYSCALL, ptrace and syscall restart breakages (Re: [RFC] weird crap with vdso on uml/i386)

2011-08-22 Thread Al Viro
On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 03:17:18AM +0100, Al Viro wrote: > I have a very strong suspicion that I know what will turn out to be involved > into that - the page eviction done by sys_brk(). Note that dirtying this > sucker is really necessary - without *s = 0 it won't segfault at all.

Re: [uml-devel] SYSCALL, ptrace and syscall restart breakages (Re: [RFC] weird crap with vdso on uml/i386)

2011-08-22 Thread Al Viro
On Mon, Aug 22, 2011 at 06:59:48PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > And the system call restart should actually work fine too, because at > syscall entry we save %ebp *both* in the slot for ebp and ecx when we > enter the first time. So the second time, we'll re-load the third > argument from ebp ag

Re: [uml-devel] SYSCALL, ptrace and syscall restart breakages (Re: [RFC] weird crap with vdso on uml/i386)

2011-08-22 Thread Al Viro
On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 02:13:12AM +0100, Al Viro wrote: > *UGH*. OK, > 1) I'm an idiot; int_ret_from_sys_call does *not* usually step on > rbp (it's callee-saved). So normally ebp is left as is on the way out, > which is why we don't see stuff getting bugg

Re: [uml-devel] SYSCALL, ptrace and syscall restart breakages (Re: [RFC] weird crap with vdso on uml/i386)

2011-08-22 Thread Al Viro
On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 02:01:46AM +0100, Al Viro wrote: > now, what is going to happen to %ebp if we go through IRET path, for any > reason? From my reading it appears that right after that IRET we'll have > ebp containing arg6. I.e. what we'd pushed on stack. Now, popl %e

Re: [uml-devel] SYSCALL, ptrace and syscall restart breakages (Re: [RFC] weird crap with vdso on uml/i386)

2011-08-22 Thread Al Viro
On Mon, Aug 22, 2011 at 05:22:07PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > You guys seem to positively _want_ to make this a bigger issue than it > is. As far as I can tell, nobody has ever even noticed this problem > before, and we already have a trivial fix ("don't do it then") for the > case Al actually

Re: [uml-devel] SYSCALL, ptrace and syscall restart breakages (Re: [RFC] weird crap with vdso on uml/i386)

2011-08-22 Thread Al Viro
On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 01:03:14AM +0100, Al Viro wrote: > On Mon, Aug 22, 2011 at 04:27:51PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > > So I think the "let's fix the vdso case for sysenter" + "let's remove > > the 32-bit syscall vdso" is the right

Re: [uml-devel] SYSCALL, ptrace and syscall restart breakages (Re: [RFC] weird crap with vdso on uml/i386)

2011-08-22 Thread Al Viro
On Mon, Aug 22, 2011 at 04:27:51PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > So I think the "let's fix the vdso case for sysenter" + "let's remove > the 32-bit syscall vdso" is the right solution. If somebody has > hardcoded syscall instructions, or generates them dynamically with > some JIT, that's their pr

Re: [uml-devel] SYSCALL, ptrace and syscall restart breakages (Re: [RFC] weird crap with vdso on uml/i386)

2011-08-22 Thread Al Viro
On Mon, Aug 22, 2011 at 04:40:51PM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote: > Just to make sure I'm grokking this correctly - we want to use int $0x80 > only for the SYSCALL variant in __kernel_vsyscall, right? Not for all > 32-bit syscalls on a 64-bit kernel. Um... The problem is, syscall restart with SYS

Re: [uml-devel] SYSCALL, ptrace and syscall restart breakages (Re: [RFC] weird crap with vdso on uml/i386)

2011-08-21 Thread Al Viro
On Sun, Aug 21, 2011 at 09:11:54PM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > > lack of point - the *only* CPU where it would matter would be K6-2, IIRC, > > and (again, IIRC) it had some differences in SYSCALL semantics compared to > > K7 (which supports SYSENTER as well). Bugger if I remember what those > >

Re: [uml-devel] SYSCALL, ptrace and syscall restart breakages (Re: [RFC] weird crap with vdso on uml/i386)

2011-08-21 Thread Al Viro
On Sun, Aug 21, 2011 at 06:41:16PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Sun, Aug 21, 2011 at 6:16 PM, Al Viro wrote: > > > > Is that ability a part of userland ABI or are we declaring that hopelessly > > wrong and require to go through the function in vdso32? ?Linus? > >

Re: [uml-devel] SYSCALL, ptrace and syscall restart breakages (Re: [RFC] weird crap with vdso on uml/i386)

2011-08-21 Thread Al Viro
On Sun, Aug 21, 2011 at 10:01:40PM -0400, Andrew Lutomirski wrote: > 3. We're worried that pt_regs-using compat syscalls might want the > regs to appear to match the actual arguments (why?) run strace and you'll see why. > 4. ptrace expects the "registers" when SYSCALL happens to match the > i

Re: [uml-devel] SYSCALL, ptrace and syscall restart breakages (Re: [RFC] weird crap with vdso on uml/i386)

2011-08-21 Thread Al Viro
On Sun, Aug 21, 2011 at 06:09:00PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Sun, Aug 21, 2011 at 5:44 PM, Andrew Lutomirski wrote: > > > > Which suggests an easy-ish fix: if sysenter is used or if syscall is > > entered from the EIP is is supposed to be entered from, then just > > change ip in the argume

Re: [uml-devel] SYSCALL, ptrace and syscall restart breakages (Re: [RFC] weird crap with vdso on uml/i386)

2011-08-21 Thread Al Viro
On Sun, Aug 21, 2011 at 08:44:12PM -0400, Andrew Lutomirski wrote: > This is, IMO, gross -- if the values in pt_regs matched what they were > when sysenter / syscall was issued, then we'd be fine -- we could > restart the syscall and everything would work. Apparently ptrace > users have a problem

Re: [uml-devel] SYSCALL, ptrace and syscall restart breakages (Re: [RFC] weird crap with vdso on uml/i386)

2011-08-21 Thread Al Viro
On Sun, Aug 21, 2011 at 03:43:52PM +0100, Al Viro wrote: > We do not lie to ptrace and iret. At all. We do just what you have > described. And fuck up when restart returns us to the SYSCALL / SYSENTER > instruction again, which expects the different calling conventions, > s

Re: [uml-devel] SYSCALL, ptrace and syscall restart breakages (Re: [RFC] weird crap with vdso on uml/i386)

2011-08-21 Thread Al Viro
On Sun, Aug 21, 2011 at 09:37:18AM -0400, Andrew Lutomirski wrote: > Gack. Is this a holdover from the 32-bit code that shares the > argument save area with the parameters passed on the C stack? If so, > we could just set up the argument save area honestly and pass the real > parameters in regis

Re: [uml-devel] SYSCALL, ptrace and syscall restart breakages (Re: [RFC] weird crap with vdso on uml/i386)

2011-08-21 Thread Al Viro
On Sun, Aug 21, 2011 at 07:24:35AM -0400, Andrew Lutomirski wrote: > I don't see the point of all this hackery at all. sysenter/sysexit > indeed screws up some registers, but we can return on the iret path in > the case of restart. We *do* return on iret path in case of restart, TYVM. > So why

[uml-devel] SYSCALL, ptrace and syscall restart breakages (Re: [RFC] weird crap with vdso on uml/i386)

2011-08-21 Thread Al Viro
On Sun, Aug 21, 2011 at 07:34:43AM +0100, Al Viro wrote: > Suppose we have a traced process. foo6() is called and the thing it > stopped before the sys_foo6() is reached kernel-side. The sixth argument > is on stack, ebp is set to user esp. SYSENTER happens, we read the > 6th a

Re: [uml-devel] [RFC] weird crap with vdso on uml/i386

2011-08-20 Thread Al Viro
On Sat, Aug 20, 2011 at 05:40:03PM -0400, Andrew Lutomirski wrote: > will cause iret (if iret happens) to restore the original rbp in rcx > (why? -- it seems okay if syscall is hit in __kernel_vsyscall but not > if something else does the syscall). I don't see what saves rbp to > the stack frame.

Re: [uml-devel] [RFC] weird crap with vdso on uml/i386

2011-08-20 Thread Al Viro
On Sat, Aug 20, 2011 at 05:22:23PM +0200, Richard Weinberger wrote: > Hmmm, very strange. > Sadly I cannot reproduce the issue. :( > Everything works fine within UML. > (Of course I've applied your vDSO/i386 patches) > > My test setup: > Host kernel: 2.6.37 and 3.0.1 > Distro: openSUSE 11.4/x86_6

[uml-devel] [RFC] weird crap with vdso on uml/i386

2011-08-19 Thread Al Viro
On Fri, Aug 19, 2011 at 10:51:51AM +0200, Richard Weinberger wrote: > Please slow down a bit. :-) > All these branches are just for testing purposes. > That's why I have not announced them nor sent a pull request to Linus. > > Anyway, thanks for the hints! np... FWIW, there's a really ugly bug

Re: [uml-devel] Subject: [PATCH 00/91] pending uml patches

2011-08-18 Thread Al Viro
On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 08:19:46PM +0100, Al Viro wrote: > On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 09:12:47PM +0200, Richard Weinberger wrote: > > Have you touched your patches since yesterday? > > I've already pulled and uploaded them to my shiny new git repo at: > > git://git.kernel.or

Re: [uml-devel] Subject: [PATCH 00/91] pending uml patches

2011-08-18 Thread Al Viro
On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 09:12:47PM +0200, Richard Weinberger wrote: > Have you touched your patches since yesterday? > I've already pulled and uploaded them to my shiny new git repo at: > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/rw/linux-um.git unstable Reordered and added missing S-o-b on a

[uml-devel] Subject: [PATCH 91/91] um: distribute exports to where exported stuff is defined

2011-08-18 Thread Al Viro
ksyms.c is down to the stuff defined in various USER_OBJS Signed-off-by: Al Viro --- arch/um/kernel/exec.c | 18 ++ arch/um/kernel/irq.c |1 + arch/um/kernel/ksyms.c| 38 +- arch/um/kernel/mem.c

[uml-devel] Subject: [PATCH 90/91] um: kill system-um.h

2011-08-18 Thread Al Viro
most of it belonged in irqflags.h, actually Signed-off-by: Al Viro --- arch/um/include/asm/irqflags.h | 38 - arch/um/include/asm/system-um.h | 45 --- arch/x86/um/asm/system.h|4 ++- 3 files changed, 40

[uml-devel] Subject: [PATCH 89/91] um: generic ftrace.h will do...

2011-08-18 Thread Al Viro
Signed-off-by: Al Viro --- arch/um/include/asm/Kbuild |1 + arch/um/include/asm/ftrace.h |1 - 2 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) delete mode 100644 arch/um/include/asm/ftrace.h diff --git a/arch/um/include/asm/Kbuild b/arch/um/include/asm/Kbuild index 5962826..451f451

[uml-devel] Subject: [PATCH 87/91] um: asm/pda.h is not needed anymore

2011-08-18 Thread Al Viro
Signed-off-by: Al Viro --- arch/um/include/asm/pda.h | 21 - 1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-) delete mode 100644 arch/um/include/asm/pda.h diff --git a/arch/um/include/asm/pda.h b/arch/um/include/asm/pda.h deleted file mode 100644 index ddcd774..000

[uml-devel] Subject: [PATCH 88/91] um: segment.h is x86-only and needed only there

2011-08-18 Thread Al Viro
Signed-off-by: Al Viro --- arch/{um/include => x86/um}/asm/segment.h |0 1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) rename arch/{um/include => x86/um}/asm/segment.h (100%) diff --git a/arch/um/include/asm/segment.h b/arch/x86/um/asm/segment.h similarity index 100% rename fro

[uml-devel] Subject: [PATCH 86/91] um: hw_irq.h can go generic as well

2011-08-18 Thread Al Viro
Signed-off-by: Al Viro --- arch/um/include/asm/Kbuild |2 +- arch/um/include/asm/hw_irq.h |7 --- 2 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-) delete mode 100644 arch/um/include/asm/hw_irq.h diff --git a/arch/um/include/asm/Kbuild b/arch/um/include/asm/Kbuild index e16895d

[uml-devel] Subject: [PATCH 85/91] um: switch to generic-y

2011-08-18 Thread Al Viro
kill wrapper headers Signed-off-by: Al Viro --- arch/um/include/asm/Kbuild |2 ++ arch/um/include/asm/bug.h |6 -- arch/um/include/asm/cputime.h |6 -- arch/um/include/asm/device.h|7 --- arch/um/include/asm/emergency

[uml-devel] Subject: [PATCH 84/91] um: clean Kconfig up a bit

2011-08-18 Thread Al Viro
* kill duplicates with drivers/char/Kconfig * take watchdog one into drivers/watchdog/Kconfig * take mmapper to arch/um/Kconfig.um * rename Kconfig.char menu to "UML Character Devices" Signed-off-by: Al Viro --- arch/um/Kconfig.char

[uml-devel] Subject: [PATCH 83/91] um: a couple of missing dependencies...

2011-08-18 Thread Al Viro
Signed-off-by: Al Viro --- drivers/net/wireless/ath/Kconfig |2 +- drivers/net/wireless/rtlwifi/Kconfig |4 ++-- 2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/Kconfig b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/Kconfig index d1b2306..47d0de8 100644 --- a

[uml-devel] Subject: [PATCH 82/91] um: kill useless argument of free_chan() and free_one_chan()

2011-08-18 Thread Al Viro
delay_free_irq is always 0 for those... Signed-off-by: Al Viro --- arch/um/drivers/chan_kern.c | 10 +- 1 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) diff --git a/arch/um/drivers/chan_kern.c b/arch/um/drivers/chan_kern.c index e040683..420e2c8 100644 --- a/arch/um/drivers

[uml-devel] Subject: [PATCH 81/91] um: clean arch_ptrace() up a bit

2011-08-18 Thread Al Viro
1) take subarch-specific stuff to subarch_ptrace() 2) PTRACE_{PEEK,POKE}{TEXT,DATA} is handled by ptrace_request() just fine... Signed-off-by: Al Viro --- arch/um/include/asm/ptrace-generic.h |4 arch/um/kernel/ptrace.c | 28 arch/x86/um/asm

[uml-devel] Subject: [PATCH 78/91] um: switch to use of drivers/Kconfig

2011-08-18 Thread Al Viro
Signed-off-by: Al Viro --- arch/um/Kconfig.rest | 23 +-- drivers/char/Kconfig |6 +++--- drivers/char/ttyprintk.c |2 +- drivers/input/Kconfig |2 +- drivers/isdn/Kconfig |2 +- drivers/misc/Kconfig

[uml-devel] Subject: [PATCH 80/91] um: unify ptrace_user.h

2011-08-18 Thread Al Viro
Signed-off-by: Al Viro --- arch/um/include/shared/ptrace_user.h |3 +- arch/um/os-Linux/skas/process.c|3 +- arch/um/os-Linux/start_up.c|9 +++--- arch/x86/um/ptrace_64.c|2 +- arch/x86/um/shared/sysdep/ptrace_64.h

[uml-devel] Subject: [PATCH 79/91] um: unify KSTK_...

2011-08-18 Thread Al Viro
... and switch get_thread_register() to HOST_... for register numbers Signed-off-by: Al Viro --- arch/x86/um/asm/processor.h |4 arch/x86/um/asm/processor_32.h |4 arch/x86/um/asm/processor_64.h |3 --- arch/x86/um/os-Linux/registers.c | 12 ++-- 4

[uml-devel] Subject: [PATCH 77/91] um: fix gcov build breakage

2011-08-18 Thread Al Viro
a) exports in gmon_syms.c duplicate kernel/gcov/* ones b) excluding -pg in vdso compile is not enough - -fprofile-arcs and -ftest-coverage also needs to be excluded Signed-off-by: Al Viro --- arch/um/kernel/gmon_syms.c | 15 --- arch/x86/um/vdso/Makefile |4 ++-- 2 files

[uml-devel] Subject: [PATCH 76/91] um: page_offset.h is never used

2011-08-18 Thread Al Viro
... and neither is the only define in it Signed-off-by: Al Viro --- arch/um/include/asm/page_offset.h |1 - 1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) delete mode 100644 arch/um/include/asm/page_offset.h diff --git a/arch/um/include/asm/page_offset.h b/arch/um/include/asm

[uml-devel] Subject: [PATCH 74/91] um: required-features.h is there only to shadow x86 one...

2011-08-18 Thread Al Viro
Signed-off-by: Al Viro --- .../{um/include => x86/um}/asm/required-features.h |0 1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) rename arch/{um/include => x86/um}/asm/required-features.h (100%) diff --git a/arch/um/include/asm/required-features.h b/arch/x86/um/asm/required-feat

[uml-devel] Subject: [PATCH 75/91] um: irq_vectors.h just shadows x86 one

2011-08-18 Thread Al Viro
Signed-off-by: Al Viro --- arch/{um/include => x86/um}/asm/irq_vectors.h |0 1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) rename arch/{um/include => x86/um}/asm/irq_vectors.h (100%) diff --git a/arch/um/include/asm/irq_vectors.h b/arch/x86/um/asm/irq_vectors.h similarity ind

[uml-devel] Subject: [PATCH 73/91] um: asm/apic.h is there only to shadow the x86 one...

2011-08-18 Thread Al Viro
... so take it to arch/um/x86/asm. Signed-off-by: Al Viro --- arch/{um/include => x86/um}/asm/apic.h |0 1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) rename arch/{um/include => x86/um}/asm/apic.h (100%) diff --git a/arch/um/include/asm/apic.h b/arch/x86/um/asm/apic.h similarity

[uml-devel] Subject: [PATCH 71/91] um: take ldt.h to arch/x86/um/asm/mm_context.h

2011-08-18 Thread Al Viro
eded in part of places that include it (we want asm/ldt.h in those) and it can be trivially expanded into the single remaining one. Signed-off-by: Al Viro --- arch/um/include/asm/mmu.h|4 +- arch/um/include/shared/ldt.h | 37 - arch/x86/um/asm/mm_context.h

[uml-devel] Subject: [PATCH 72/91] um: take ubd_user.h to its users...

2011-08-18 Thread Al Viro
Signed-off-by: Al Viro --- arch/um/{include/shared => drivers}/ubd_user.h |0 1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) rename arch/um/{include/shared => drivers}/ubd_user.h (100%) diff --git a/arch/um/include/shared/ubd_user.h b/arch/um/drivers/ubd_user.h similarity ind

[uml-devel] Subject: [PATCH 70/91] um: merge signal_{32,64}.c

2011-08-18 Thread Al Viro
Signed-off-by: Al Viro --- arch/x86/um/Makefile |2 +- arch/x86/um/asm/ptrace_64.h |2 +- arch/x86/um/{signal_32.c => signal.c} | 223 ++- arch/x86/um/signal_64.c | 236 - arch/x86

[uml-devel] Subject: [PATCH 69/91] um: no need to play with save_sp in signal frame setup anymore

2011-08-18 Thread Al Viro
Signed-off-by: Al Viro --- arch/x86/um/signal_32.c | 39 --- arch/x86/um/signal_64.c | 33 +++-- 2 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 57 deletions(-) diff --git a/arch/x86/um/signal_32.c b/arch/x86/um/signal_32.c index 2eebdc0

[uml-devel] Subject: [PATCH 68/91] um: increase stack growth cushion in pagefault

2011-08-18 Thread Al Viro
analog of [PATCH] i386: let usermode execute the "enter" instruction from circa 2006. Signed-off-by: Al Viro --- arch/x86/um/asm/processor.h|3 +++ arch/x86/um/asm/processor_32.h |3 --- arch/x86/um/asm/processor_64.h |3 --- 3 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 6

[uml-devel] Subject: [PATCH 67/91] um: merge HOST_... of registers common on i386 and amd64

2011-08-18 Thread Al Viro
Signed-off-by: Al Viro --- arch/x86/um/ptrace_32.c | 14 +++--- arch/x86/um/ptrace_64.c | 14 +++--- arch/x86/um/shared/sysdep/ptrace_32.h | 14 +++--- arch/x86/um/shared/sysdep/ptrace_64.h | 14 +++--- arch/x86/um/signal_32.c

[uml-devel] Subject: [PATCH 66/91] um: sanitize paths in sys_call_table* includes

2011-08-18 Thread Al Viro
Signed-off-by: Al Viro --- arch/x86/um/sys_call_table_32.S |2 +- arch/x86/um/sys_call_table_64.c |2 +- 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/arch/x86/um/sys_call_table_32.S b/arch/x86/um/sys_call_table_32.S index de27407..c3431cf 100644 --- a/arch/x86/um

[uml-devel] Subject: [PATCH 65/91] um: merge os-Linux/tls.c into arch/x86/um/os-Linux/tls.c

2011-08-18 Thread Al Viro
it's i386-specific; moreover, analogs on other targets have incompatible interface - PTRACE_GET_THREAD_AREA does exist elsewhere, but struct user_desc does *not* Signed-off-by: Al Viro --- arch/um/include/shared/os.h |5 - arch/um/os-Linux/Makefile |4 ++-- arch/

[uml-devel] Subject: [PATCH 64/91] um: move asm/desc.h into arch/x86/um/asm

2011-08-18 Thread Al Viro
its only purpose is to shadow the x86 asm/desc.h Signed-off-by: Al Viro --- arch/{um/include => x86/um}/asm/desc.h |0 1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) rename arch/{um/include => x86/um}/asm/desc.h (100%) diff --git a/arch/um/include/asm/desc.h b/arch/x86/um/asm/

[uml-devel] Subject: [PATCH 63/91] um: merge host_ldt_{32,64}.h

2011-08-18 Thread Al Viro
Signed-off-by: Al Viro --- arch/x86/um/shared/sysdep/host_ldt.h| 38 -- arch/x86/um/shared/sysdep/host_ldt_32.h | 34 --- arch/x86/um/shared/sysdep/host_ldt_64.h | 38 --- 3 files changed, 35 insertions

[uml-devel] Subject: [PATCH 62/91] um: merge tls_{32,64}.h

2011-08-18 Thread Al Viro
Signed-off-by: Al Viro --- arch/x86/um/shared/sysdep/tls.h| 38 +-- arch/x86/um/shared/sysdep/tls_32.h | 32 -- arch/x86/um/shared/sysdep/tls_64.h | 29 --- 3 files changed, 35 insertions(+), 64

[uml-devel] Subject: [PATCH 61/91] um: take um_mmu.h to asm/mmu.h, clean asm/mmu_context.h a bit

2011-08-18 Thread Al Viro
Signed-off-by: Al Viro --- arch/um/include/asm/mmu.h | 22 +- arch/um/include/asm/mmu_context.h |7 ++- arch/um/include/shared/um_mmu.h | 24 3 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) delete mode 100644 arch/um/include

[uml-devel] Subject: [PATCH 60/91] um: kill useless include of user.h

2011-08-18 Thread Al Viro
everything in USER_OBJ gets it via -include user.h Signed-off-by: Al Viro --- fs/hostfs/hostfs_user.c |1 - 1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) diff --git a/fs/hostfs/hostfs_user.c b/fs/hostfs/hostfs_user.c index d51a983..dd7bc38 100644 --- a/fs/hostfs/hostfs_user.c +++ b/fs

[uml-devel] Subject: [PATCH 59/91] um: kill um_uaccess.h

2011-08-18 Thread Al Viro
Signed-off-by: Al Viro --- arch/um/include/asm/uaccess.h | 89 +++-- arch/um/include/shared/um_uaccess.h | 94 --- 2 files changed, 84 insertions(+), 99 deletions(-) delete mode 100644 arch/um/include/shared/um_uaccess.h

[uml-devel] Subject: [PATCH 57/91] um: take chan_*.h and line.h to arch/um/drivers

2011-08-18 Thread Al Viro
Signed-off-by: Al Viro --- .../{include/shared/chan_kern.h => drivers/chan.h} |6 +++--- arch/um/drivers/chan_kern.c|2 +- arch/um/{include/shared => drivers}/chan_user.h|0 arch/um/drivers/line.c |2 +- arch/um/{i

[uml-devel] Subject: [PATCH 58/91] um: take mconsole*.h to arch/um/drivers

2011-08-18 Thread Al Viro
Signed-off-by: Al Viro --- arch/um/{include/shared => drivers}/mconsole.h |0 .../um/{include/shared => drivers}/mconsole_kern.h |0 2 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) rename arch/um/{include/shared => drivers}/mconsole.h (100%) rename arch/um/{inclu

[uml-devel] Subject: [PATCH 56/91] um: take register_winch_irq() into the caller of is_skas_winch()

2011-08-18 Thread Al Viro
Signed-off-by: Al Viro --- arch/um/drivers/chan_user.c |7 ++- arch/um/os-Linux/skas/process.c |6 +- 2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) diff --git a/arch/um/drivers/chan_user.c b/arch/um/drivers/chan_user.c index 7ed06a7..f180813 100644 --- a/arch/um/drivers

[uml-devel] Subject: [PATCH 55/91] um: kill shared/mem_kern.h

2011-08-18 Thread Al Viro
... nothing declared there exists Signed-off-by: Al Viro --- arch/um/drivers/ubd_kern.c|1 - arch/um/include/shared/mem_kern.h | 20 2 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-) delete mode 100644 arch/um/include/shared/mem_kern.h diff --git a/arch/um

[uml-devel] Subject: [PATCH 54/91] um: kill shared/tlb.h

2011-08-18 Thread Al Viro
Signed-off-by: Al Viro --- arch/um/include/shared/tlb.h | 13 - arch/um/kernel/process.c |2 +- arch/um/kernel/tlb.c |1 - 3 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-) delete mode 100644 arch/um/include/shared/tlb.h diff --git a/arch/um/include/shared

[uml-devel] Subject: [PATCH 53/91] um: make flush_tlb_kernel_range_common() static

2011-08-18 Thread Al Viro
Signed-off-by: Al Viro --- arch/um/include/shared/tlb.h |2 -- arch/um/kernel/tlb.c |2 +- 2 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/arch/um/include/shared/tlb.h b/arch/um/include/shared/tlb.h index ecd2265..8a50ce1 100644 --- a/arch/um/include/shared/tlb.h

[uml-devel] Subject: [PATCH 52/91] um: kill shared/task.h and HOST_TASK_REGS

2011-08-18 Thread Al Viro
Signed-off-by: Al Viro --- arch/um/include/shared/common-offsets.h |1 - arch/um/include/shared/task.h |9 - arch/x86/um/bugs_32.c |4 +++- 3 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-) delete mode 100644 arch/um/include/shared/task.h diff

[uml-devel] Subject: [PATCH 51/91] um: shared/syscall.h is not even included

2011-08-18 Thread Al Viro
... and functions declared in it do not exist Signed-off-by: Al Viro --- arch/um/include/shared/syscall.h | 12 1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-) delete mode 100644 arch/um/include/shared/syscall.h diff --git a/arch/um/include/shared/syscall.h b/arch/um/include

[uml-devel] Subject: [PATCH 50/91] ... and don't include kern.h unless it's needed

2011-08-18 Thread Al Viro
Signed-off-by: Al Viro --- arch/um/drivers/ssl.c |1 - arch/um/drivers/ubd_kern.c |1 - 2 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/arch/um/drivers/ssl.c b/arch/um/drivers/ssl.c index f1786e6..678e205 100644 --- a/arch/um/drivers/ssl.c +++ b/arch/um/drivers/ssl.c

[uml-devel] Subject: [PATCH 49/91] um: trim kern.h

2011-08-18 Thread Al Viro
most of the functions in there are not used in anything that ends up including that header... Signed-off-by: Al Viro --- arch/um/include/shared/kern.h | 18 -- 1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-) diff --git a/arch/um/include/shared/kern.h b/arch/um/include

[uml-devel] Subject: [PATCH 48/91] um: make load_initrd() static, kill shared/initrd.h

2011-08-18 Thread Al Viro
Signed-off-by: Al Viro --- arch/um/include/shared/initrd.h | 12 arch/um/kernel/initrd.c |4 ++-- 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-) delete mode 100644 arch/um/include/shared/initrd.h diff --git a/arch/um/include/shared/initrd.h b/arch/um/include

[uml-devel] Subject: [PATCH 46/91] um: take arch/um/sys-x86 to arch/x86/um

2011-08-18 Thread Al Viro
Signed-off-by: Al Viro --- arch/um/Makefile | 22 +++ arch/um/os-Linux/Makefile |2 +- arch/um/scripts/Makefile.rules |5 arch/{um/Makefile-x86 => x86/Makefile.um} |

[uml-devel] Subject: [PATCH 47/91] um: bury unused macros around ptrace.h

2011-08-18 Thread Al Viro
Signed-off-by: Al Viro --- arch/um/include/asm/ptrace-generic.h |4 arch/x86/um/shared/sysdep/ptrace_32.h |3 --- arch/x86/um/shared/sysdep/ptrace_64.h |3 --- 3 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-) diff --git a/arch/um/include/asm/ptrace-generic.h b/arch/um

  1   2   3   >