All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at>
To: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>, Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>
Cc: Catalin Marinas <Catalin.Marinas@arm.com>,
	Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com>,
	Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@intel.com>,
	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>,
	Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>,
	Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com>,
	Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com>,
	"linux390@de.ibm.com" <linux390@de.ibm.com>,
	Chris Metcalf <cmetcalf@tilera.com>,
	Jeff Dike <jdike@addtoit.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
	Nathan Lynch <Nathan_Lynch@mentor.com>, X86 ML <x86@kernel.org>,
	linux-arch <linux-arch@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org" <linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org" <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] arm64,ia64,ppc,s390,sh,tile,um,x86,mm: Remove default gate area
Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2014 12:20:15 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <53C8F4DF.8020103@nod.at> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140718101416.GB1818@arm.com>

Am 18.07.2014 12:14, schrieb Will Deacon:
> On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 03:47:26PM +0100, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>> On Sun, Jul 13, 2014 at 1:01 PM, Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net> wrote:
>>> The core mm code will provide a default gate area based on
>>> FIXADDR_USER_START and FIXADDR_USER_END if
>>> !defined(__HAVE_ARCH_GATE_AREA) && defined(AT_SYSINFO_EHDR).
>>>
>>> This default is only useful for ia64.  arm64, ppc, s390, sh, tile,
>>> 64-bit UML, and x86_32 have their own code just to disable it.  arm,
>>> 32-bit UML, and x86_64 have gate areas, but they have their own
>>> implementations.
>>>
>>> This gets rid of the default and moves the code into ia64.
>>>
>>> This should save some code on architectures without a gate area: it's
>>> now possible to inline the gate_area functions in the default case.
>>
>> Can one of you pull this somewhere?  Otherwise I can put it somewhere
>> stable and ask for -next inclusion, but that seems like overkill for a
>> single patch.

For the um bits:
Acked-by: Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at>

> I'd be happy to take the arm64 part, but it doesn't feel right for mm/*
> changes (or changes to other archs) to go via our tree.
> 
> I'm not sure what the best approach is if you want to send this via a single
> tree. Maybe you could ask akpm nicely?

Going though Andrew's tree sounds sane to me.

Thanks,
//richard

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at>
To: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>, Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>
Cc: "linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org" <linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linux-sh@vger.kernel.org" <linux-sh@vger.kernel.org>,
	Catalin Marinas <Catalin.Marinas@arm.com>,
	Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com>,
	"linux-mm@kvack.org" <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
	Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
	linux-arch <linux-arch@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linux-s390@vger.kernel.org" <linux-s390@vger.kernel.org>,
	X86 ML <x86@kernel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>,
	Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@intel.com>,
	"user-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net"
	<user-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>,
	Jeff Dike <jdike@addtoit.com>,
	Chris Metcalf <cmetcalf@tilera.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
	Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com>,
	Nathan Lynch <Nathan_Lynch@mentor.com>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com>,
	"linux390@de.ibm.com" <linux390@de.ibm.com>,
	"linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org" <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] arm64, ia64, ppc, s390, sh, tile, um, x86, mm: Remove default gate area
Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2014 12:20:15 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <53C8F4DF.8020103@nod.at> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140718101416.GB1818@arm.com>

Am 18.07.2014 12:14, schrieb Will Deacon:
> On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 03:47:26PM +0100, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>> On Sun, Jul 13, 2014 at 1:01 PM, Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net> wrote:
>>> The core mm code will provide a default gate area based on
>>> FIXADDR_USER_START and FIXADDR_USER_END if
>>> !defined(__HAVE_ARCH_GATE_AREA) && defined(AT_SYSINFO_EHDR).
>>>
>>> This default is only useful for ia64.  arm64, ppc, s390, sh, tile,
>>> 64-bit UML, and x86_32 have their own code just to disable it.  arm,
>>> 32-bit UML, and x86_64 have gate areas, but they have their own
>>> implementations.
>>>
>>> This gets rid of the default and moves the code into ia64.
>>>
>>> This should save some code on architectures without a gate area: it's
>>> now possible to inline the gate_area functions in the default case.
>>
>> Can one of you pull this somewhere?  Otherwise I can put it somewhere
>> stable and ask for -next inclusion, but that seems like overkill for a
>> single patch.

For the um bits:
Acked-by: Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at>

> I'd be happy to take the arm64 part, but it doesn't feel right for mm/*
> changes (or changes to other archs) to go via our tree.
> 
> I'm not sure what the best approach is if you want to send this via a single
> tree. Maybe you could ask akpm nicely?

Going though Andrew's tree sounds sane to me.

Thanks,
//richard

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel


WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at>
To: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>, Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>
Cc: "linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org" <linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linux-sh@vger.kernel.org" <linux-sh@vger.kernel.org>,
	Catalin Marinas <Catalin.Marinas@arm.com>,
	Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com>,
	"linux-mm@kvack.org" <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
	Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
	linux-arch <linux-arch@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linux-s390@vger.kernel.org" <linux-s390@vger.kernel.org>,
	X86 ML <x86@kernel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@intel.com>,
	"user-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net"
	<user-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>,
	Jeff Dike <jdike@addtoit.com>,
	Chris Metcalf <cmetcalf@tilera.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
	Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com>,
	Nathan Lynch <Nathan_Lynch@mentor.com>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com>,
	"linux390@de.ibm.com" <linux390@de.ibm.com>,
	"linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org" <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] arm64, ia64, ppc, s390, sh, tile, um, x86, mm: Remove default gate area
Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2014 12:20:15 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <53C8F4DF.8020103@nod.at> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140718101416.GB1818@arm.com>

Am 18.07.2014 12:14, schrieb Will Deacon:
> On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 03:47:26PM +0100, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>> On Sun, Jul 13, 2014 at 1:01 PM, Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net> wrote:
>>> The core mm code will provide a default gate area based on
>>> FIXADDR_USER_START and FIXADDR_USER_END if
>>> !defined(__HAVE_ARCH_GATE_AREA) && defined(AT_SYSINFO_EHDR).
>>>
>>> This default is only useful for ia64.  arm64, ppc, s390, sh, tile,
>>> 64-bit UML, and x86_32 have their own code just to disable it.  arm,
>>> 32-bit UML, and x86_64 have gate areas, but they have their own
>>> implementations.
>>>
>>> This gets rid of the default and moves the code into ia64.
>>>
>>> This should save some code on architectures without a gate area: it's
>>> now possible to inline the gate_area functions in the default case.
>>
>> Can one of you pull this somewhere?  Otherwise I can put it somewhere
>> stable and ask for -next inclusion, but that seems like overkill for a
>> single patch.

For the um bits:
Acked-by: Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at>

> I'd be happy to take the arm64 part, but it doesn't feel right for mm/*
> changes (or changes to other archs) to go via our tree.
> 
> I'm not sure what the best approach is if you want to send this via a single
> tree. Maybe you could ask akpm nicely?

Going though Andrew's tree sounds sane to me.

Thanks,
//richard

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: richard@nod.at (Richard Weinberger)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH v3] arm64, ia64, ppc, s390, sh, tile, um, x86, mm: Remove default gate area
Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2014 12:20:15 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <53C8F4DF.8020103@nod.at> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140718101416.GB1818@arm.com>

Am 18.07.2014 12:14, schrieb Will Deacon:
> On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 03:47:26PM +0100, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>> On Sun, Jul 13, 2014 at 1:01 PM, Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net> wrote:
>>> The core mm code will provide a default gate area based on
>>> FIXADDR_USER_START and FIXADDR_USER_END if
>>> !defined(__HAVE_ARCH_GATE_AREA) && defined(AT_SYSINFO_EHDR).
>>>
>>> This default is only useful for ia64.  arm64, ppc, s390, sh, tile,
>>> 64-bit UML, and x86_32 have their own code just to disable it.  arm,
>>> 32-bit UML, and x86_64 have gate areas, but they have their own
>>> implementations.
>>>
>>> This gets rid of the default and moves the code into ia64.
>>>
>>> This should save some code on architectures without a gate area: it's
>>> now possible to inline the gate_area functions in the default case.
>>
>> Can one of you pull this somewhere?  Otherwise I can put it somewhere
>> stable and ask for -next inclusion, but that seems like overkill for a
>> single patch.

For the um bits:
Acked-by: Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at>

> I'd be happy to take the arm64 part, but it doesn't feel right for mm/*
> changes (or changes to other archs) to go via our tree.
> 
> I'm not sure what the best approach is if you want to send this via a single
> tree. Maybe you could ask akpm nicely?

Going though Andrew's tree sounds sane to me.

Thanks,
//richard

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at>
To: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>, Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>
Cc: Catalin Marinas <Catalin.Marinas@arm.com>,
	Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com>,
	Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@intel.com>,
	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>,
	Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>,
	Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com>,
	Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com>,
	"linux390@de.ibm.com" <linux390@de.ibm.com>,
	Chris Metcalf <cmetcalf@tilera.com>,
	Jeff Dike <jdike@addtoit.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
	Nathan Lynch <Nathan_Lynch@mentor.com>, X86 ML <x86@kernel.org>,
	linux-arch <linux-arch@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org" <linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org" <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>,
	"linux-s390@vger.kernel.org" <linux-s390@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linux-sh@vger.kernel.org" <linux-sh@vger.kernel.org>,
	"user-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net"
	<user-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>,
	"linux-mm@kvack.org" <linux-mm@kvack.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] arm64,ia64,ppc,s390,sh,tile,um,x86,mm: Remove default gate area
Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2014 12:20:15 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <53C8F4DF.8020103@nod.at> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140718101416.GB1818@arm.com>

Am 18.07.2014 12:14, schrieb Will Deacon:
> On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 03:47:26PM +0100, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>> On Sun, Jul 13, 2014 at 1:01 PM, Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net> wrote:
>>> The core mm code will provide a default gate area based on
>>> FIXADDR_USER_START and FIXADDR_USER_END if
>>> !defined(__HAVE_ARCH_GATE_AREA) && defined(AT_SYSINFO_EHDR).
>>>
>>> This default is only useful for ia64.  arm64, ppc, s390, sh, tile,
>>> 64-bit UML, and x86_32 have their own code just to disable it.  arm,
>>> 32-bit UML, and x86_64 have gate areas, but they have their own
>>> implementations.
>>>
>>> This gets rid of the default and moves the code into ia64.
>>>
>>> This should save some code on architectures without a gate area: it's
>>> now possible to inline the gate_area functions in the default case.
>>
>> Can one of you pull this somewhere?  Otherwise I can put it somewhere
>> stable and ask for -next inclusion, but that seems like overkill for a
>> single patch.

For the um bits:
Acked-by: Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at>

> I'd be happy to take the arm64 part, but it doesn't feel right for mm/*
> changes (or changes to other archs) to go via our tree.
> 
> I'm not sure what the best approach is if you want to send this via a single
> tree. Maybe you could ask akpm nicely?

Going though Andrew's tree sounds sane to me.

Thanks,
//richard

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>

  reply	other threads:[~2014-07-18 10:20 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 37+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-07-13 20:01 [PATCH v3] arm64,ia64,ppc,s390,sh,tile,um,x86,mm: Remove default gate area Andy Lutomirski
2014-07-13 20:01 ` Andy Lutomirski
2014-07-13 20:01 ` Andy Lutomirski
2014-07-13 20:01 ` [PATCH v3] arm64, ia64, ppc, s390, sh, tile, um, x86, mm: " Andy Lutomirski
2014-07-13 20:01 ` Andy Lutomirski
2014-07-13 20:01 ` [PATCH v3] arm64,ia64,ppc,s390,sh,tile,um,x86,mm: " Andy Lutomirski
2014-07-13 20:01 ` Andy Lutomirski
2014-07-13 20:01 ` Andy Lutomirski
2014-07-15 14:47 ` Andy Lutomirski
2014-07-15 14:47   ` Andy Lutomirski
2014-07-15 14:47   ` [PATCH v3] arm64, ia64, ppc, s390, sh, tile, um, x86, mm: " Andy Lutomirski
2014-07-15 14:47   ` Andy Lutomirski
2014-07-15 14:47   ` Andy Lutomirski
2014-07-18 10:14   ` Will Deacon
2014-07-18 10:14     ` [PATCH v3] arm64,ia64,ppc,s390,sh,tile,um,x86,mm: " Will Deacon
2014-07-18 10:14     ` [PATCH v3] arm64, ia64, ppc, s390, sh, tile, um, x86, mm: " Will Deacon
2014-07-18 10:14     ` Will Deacon
2014-07-18 10:14     ` Will Deacon
2014-07-18 10:20     ` Richard Weinberger [this message]
2014-07-18 10:20       ` [PATCH v3] arm64,ia64,ppc,s390,sh,tile,um,x86,mm: " Richard Weinberger
2014-07-18 10:20       ` [PATCH v3] arm64, ia64, ppc, s390, sh, tile, um, x86, mm: " Richard Weinberger
2014-07-18 10:20       ` Richard Weinberger
2014-07-18 10:20       ` Richard Weinberger
2014-07-18 16:53       ` [PATCH v3] arm64,ia64,ppc,s390,sh,tile,um,x86,mm: " Andy Lutomirski
2014-07-18 16:53         ` Andy Lutomirski
2014-07-18 16:53         ` [PATCH v3] arm64, ia64, ppc, s390, sh, tile, um, x86, mm: " Andy Lutomirski
2014-07-18 16:53         ` [uml-devel] " Andy Lutomirski
2014-07-18 17:28         ` [PATCH v3] arm64,ia64,ppc,s390,sh,tile,um,x86,mm: " Nathan Lynch
2014-07-18 17:28           ` Nathan Lynch
2014-07-18 17:28           ` [PATCH v3] arm64, ia64, ppc, s390, sh, tile, um, x86, mm: " Nathan Lynch
2014-07-18 17:28           ` Nathan Lynch
2014-07-18 17:28           ` Nathan Lynch
2014-07-18 18:36         ` [PATCH v3] arm64,ia64,ppc,s390,sh,tile,um,x86,mm: " H. Peter Anvin
2014-07-18 18:36           ` H. Peter Anvin
2014-07-18 18:36           ` [PATCH v3] arm64, ia64, ppc, s390, sh, tile, um, x86, mm: " H. Peter Anvin
2014-07-18 18:36           ` H. Peter Anvin
2014-07-18 18:36           ` H. Peter Anvin

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=53C8F4DF.8020103@nod.at \
    --to=richard@nod.at \
    --cc=Catalin.Marinas@arm.com \
    --cc=Nathan_Lynch@mentor.com \
    --cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
    --cc=cmetcalf@tilera.com \
    --cc=fenghua.yu@intel.com \
    --cc=heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com \
    --cc=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=jdike@addtoit.com \
    --cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux390@de.ibm.com \
    --cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
    --cc=luto@amacapital.net \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=paulus@samba.org \
    --cc=schwidefsky@de.ibm.com \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=tony.luck@intel.com \
    --cc=will.deacon@arm.com \
    --cc=x86@kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.