From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from sc8-sf-mx2-b.sourceforge.net ([10.3.1.92] helo=mail.sourceforge.net) by sc8-sf-list1-new.sourceforge.net with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HvkCd-0001FL-Nz for user-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net; Tue, 05 Jun 2007 18:20:48 -0700 Received: from smtp2.linux-foundation.org ([207.189.120.14]) by mail.sourceforge.net with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.44) id 1HvkCd-00032i-EB for user-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net; Tue, 05 Jun 2007 18:20:47 -0700 Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2007 18:20:24 -0700 From: Andrew Morton Message-Id: <20070605182024.003502d4.akpm@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: <20070606003752.GA11511@c2.user-mode-linux.org> References: <20070605205055.GA9770@c2.user-mode-linux.org> <20070605170001.c8b2110e.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20070606003752.GA11511@c2.user-mode-linux.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [uml-devel] [PATCH 2/2] UML - Fix kernel stack size on x86_64 List-Id: The user-mode Linux development list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: user-mode-linux-devel-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net Errors-To: user-mode-linux-devel-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net To: Jeff Dike Cc: LKML , uml-devel On Tue, 5 Jun 2007 20:37:52 -0400 Jeff Dike wrote: > On Tue, Jun 05, 2007 at 05:00:01PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > > On Tue, 5 Jun 2007 16:50:55 -0400 > > Jeff Dike wrote: > > > > > [ This is 2.6.22 material ] > > > > > > Having KERNEL_STACK_ORDER in defconfig overrides the value provided by > > > Kconfig, breaking UML/x86_64, which wants 2 page stacks. > > > That means the Kconfig rules are wrong, surely? > > I'm far from a Kconfig expert, Me either. I learn enough for the problem at hand, then instaforget it again. Kinda like perl. > but what I have is > > config KERNEL_STACK_ORDER > int "Kernel stack size order" > default 1 if 64BIT > default 0 if !64BIT > > which seems reasonably clear and simple... > hm, OK, there's the problem. This is an offered-to-the-user config option. If you do - int "Kernel stack size order" + int then this rule will no longer be offered to the user and `make oldconfig' (actually anythingconfig) will override whatever happens to be in .config for KERNEL_STACK_ORDER. I'm not sure if that's actually what you want, but if the current situation is that a random CONFIG_KERNEL_STACK_ORDER=0 left over in .config will break the kernel at runtime then I think something sterner than editing defconfig is needed? ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now. http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/ _______________________________________________ User-mode-linux-devel mailing list User-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/user-mode-linux-devel From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S934463AbXFFBU5 (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 Jun 2007 21:20:57 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S933190AbXFFBUt (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 Jun 2007 21:20:49 -0400 Received: from smtp2.linux-foundation.org ([207.189.120.14]:56337 "EHLO smtp2.linux-foundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S933451AbXFFBUs (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 Jun 2007 21:20:48 -0400 Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2007 18:20:24 -0700 From: Andrew Morton To: Jeff Dike Cc: LKML , uml-devel Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] UML - Fix kernel stack size on x86_64 Message-Id: <20070605182024.003502d4.akpm@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: <20070606003752.GA11511@c2.user-mode-linux.org> References: <20070605205055.GA9770@c2.user-mode-linux.org> <20070605170001.c8b2110e.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20070606003752.GA11511@c2.user-mode-linux.org> X-Mailer: Sylpheed 2.4.1 (GTK+ 2.8.17; x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 5 Jun 2007 20:37:52 -0400 Jeff Dike wrote: > On Tue, Jun 05, 2007 at 05:00:01PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > > On Tue, 5 Jun 2007 16:50:55 -0400 > > Jeff Dike wrote: > > > > > [ This is 2.6.22 material ] > > > > > > Having KERNEL_STACK_ORDER in defconfig overrides the value provided by > > > Kconfig, breaking UML/x86_64, which wants 2 page stacks. > > > That means the Kconfig rules are wrong, surely? > > I'm far from a Kconfig expert, Me either. I learn enough for the problem at hand, then instaforget it again. Kinda like perl. > but what I have is > > config KERNEL_STACK_ORDER > int "Kernel stack size order" > default 1 if 64BIT > default 0 if !64BIT > > which seems reasonably clear and simple... > hm, OK, there's the problem. This is an offered-to-the-user config option. If you do - int "Kernel stack size order" + int then this rule will no longer be offered to the user and `make oldconfig' (actually anythingconfig) will override whatever happens to be in .config for KERNEL_STACK_ORDER. I'm not sure if that's actually what you want, but if the current situation is that a random CONFIG_KERNEL_STACK_ORDER=0 left over in .config will break the kernel at runtime then I think something sterner than editing defconfig is needed?