From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list linux-mips); Mon, 23 Jan 2006 15:33:43 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mipsfw.mips-uk.com ([194.74.144.146]:34838 "EHLO bacchus.net.dhis.org") by ftp.linux-mips.org with ESMTP id S3465575AbWAWPd0 (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 Jan 2006 15:33:26 +0000 Received: from denk.linux-mips.net (denk.linux-mips.net [127.0.0.1]) by bacchus.net.dhis.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k0NFbG2f020208; Mon, 23 Jan 2006 15:37:16 GMT Received: (from ralf@localhost) by denk.linux-mips.net (8.13.4/8.13.4/Submit) id k0NFbFUi020207; Mon, 23 Jan 2006 15:37:15 GMT Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 15:37:15 +0000 From: Ralf Baechle To: "P. Christeas" Cc: MIPS Linux List Subject: Re: Fixes for uaccess.h with gcc >= 4.0.1 Message-ID: <20060123153715.GC18665@linux-mips.org> References: <20060123150507.GA18665@linux-mips.org> <200601231718.40581.p_christ@hol.gr> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200601231718.40581.p_christ@hol.gr> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i Return-Path: X-Envelope-To: <"|/home/ecartis/ecartis -s linux-mips"> (uid 0) X-Orcpt: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org Original-Recipient: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org X-archive-position: 10065 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org Errors-to: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org X-original-sender: ralf@linux-mips.org Precedence: bulk X-list: linux-mips On Mon, Jan 23, 2006 at 05:18:38PM +0200, P. Christeas wrote: > On Monday 23 January 2006 5:05 pm, Ralf Baechle wrote: > > > I'd appreciate if somebody with gcc 4.0.1 could test this kernel patch > > below. > > > > Ralf > Is that for 2.4? 2.4 is a no go for all architectures with gcc >= 4.0.0 and in case of MIPS even gcc 3.4 is somewhat dubious. > 2.6 doesn't seem to have that problem.. It's probably a matter of configuration then. Basically with our current uaccess.h and gcc >= 4.0.1 the attempt to pass a pointer to a const variable as the pointer argument to get_user or __get_user will blow up. It's always been a bug - but gcc before 4.0.1 were accepting this silently. Ralf