From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list linux-mips); Mon, 23 Jan 2006 16:09:41 +0000 (GMT) Received: from bender.bawue.de ([193.7.176.20]:27090 "EHLO bender.bawue.de") by ftp.linux-mips.org with ESMTP id S3465592AbWAWQJU (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 Jan 2006 16:09:20 +0000 Received: from localhost (unknown [194.74.144.146]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DES-CBC3-SHA (168/168 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by bender.bawue.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 91F1E460ED; Mon, 23 Jan 2006 17:13:30 +0100 (MET) Received: from ths by localhost with local (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1F14JZ-0004wz-UM; Mon, 23 Jan 2006 16:13:09 +0000 Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 16:13:09 +0000 To: "P. Christeas" Cc: MIPS Linux List Subject: Re: Fixes for uaccess.h with gcc >= 4.0.1 Message-ID: <20060123161309.GA13459@networkno.de> References: <20060123150507.GA18665@linux-mips.org> <200601231718.40581.p_christ@hol.gr> <20060123153715.GC18665@linux-mips.org> <200601231750.55246.p_christ@hol.gr> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200601231750.55246.p_christ@hol.gr> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11 From: Thiemo Seufer 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: 10073 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: ths@networkno.de Precedence: bulk X-list: linux-mips On Mon, Jan 23, 2006 at 05:50:53PM +0200, P. Christeas wrote: > On Monday 23 January 2006 5:37 pm, Ralf Baechle wrote: > > 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 > > I 've been compiling with gcc 4.0.2 (my tree is Linus') and haven't seen any > message like that. The case I saw happened for 32bit compat ioctls in a 64bit kernel. > It all compiles fine. Is there a point in testing your > patch as well? Well, if you want to be sure it doesn't break your system... Thiemo