* Re: [PATCH] perf arm64: Fix mksyscalltbl, don't lose syscalls due to sort -nu
@ 2022-11-25 13:56 ` Arnd Bergmann
0 siblings, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread
From: Arnd Bergmann @ 2022-11-25 13:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Leo Yan, Vincent Whitchurch
Cc: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo, Hans-Peter Nilsson, linux-arm-kernel,
linux-kernel, John Garry, Will Deacon, Mathieu Poirier,
Peter Zijlstra, Ingo Molnar, Mark Rutland, Alexander Shishkin,
Jiri Olsa, Namhyung Kim, Kim Phillips
On Fri, Nov 25, 2022, at 13:54, Leo Yan wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 25, 2022 at 12:53:10PM +0100, Vincent Whitchurch wrote:
>> It looks like this patch was never applied? AFAICS it is still needed
>> on current HEAD and it still applies cleanly.
>
> Thanks a lot for bringing up this.
>
> Before there have a discussion [1] for refactoring Arm64 system call
> table but it didn't really happen.
I actually worked on this last week and did a new series to convert
the old asm-generic/unistd.h header into the syscall.tbl format,
and change arm64 to use that.
You can find my work in the 'syscall-tbl' branch of my asm-generic
tree [1]. This has only seen light build testing so far, and is
probably still buggy, but most of the work is there. The missing
bits are the Makefiles for the other seven architectures using
asm-generic/unistd.h, and checking the output to ensure the
contents are still the same.
> I think it's the right thing to merge
> this patch, @Arnaldo, could you pick up this patch?
That sounds fine to me.
Arnd
[1] https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/arnd/asm-generic.git/
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH] perf arm64: Fix mksyscalltbl, don't lose syscalls due to sort -nu
2022-11-25 13:56 ` Arnd Bergmann
@ 2022-12-02 18:39 ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
-1 siblings, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread
From: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo @ 2022-12-02 18:39 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Arnd Bergmann
Cc: Leo Yan, Vincent Whitchurch, Hans-Peter Nilsson, linux-arm-kernel,
linux-kernel, John Garry, Will Deacon, Mathieu Poirier,
Peter Zijlstra, Ingo Molnar, Mark Rutland, Alexander Shishkin,
Jiri Olsa, Namhyung Kim, Kim Phillips
Em Fri, Nov 25, 2022 at 02:56:31PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann escreveu:
> On Fri, Nov 25, 2022, at 13:54, Leo Yan wrote:
> > On Fri, Nov 25, 2022 at 12:53:10PM +0100, Vincent Whitchurch wrote:
>
> >> It looks like this patch was never applied? AFAICS it is still needed
> >> on current HEAD and it still applies cleanly.
> >
> > Thanks a lot for bringing up this.
> >
> > Before there have a discussion [1] for refactoring Arm64 system call
> > table but it didn't really happen.
>
> I actually worked on this last week and did a new series to convert
> the old asm-generic/unistd.h header into the syscall.tbl format,
> and change arm64 to use that.
>
> You can find my work in the 'syscall-tbl' branch of my asm-generic
> tree [1]. This has only seen light build testing so far, and is
> probably still buggy, but most of the work is there. The missing
> bits are the Makefiles for the other seven architectures using
> asm-generic/unistd.h, and checking the output to ensure the
> contents are still the same.
>
> > I think it's the right thing to merge
> > this patch, @Arnaldo, could you pick up this patch?
>
> That sounds fine to me.
Sure, and adding an Acked-by: Arnd
> Arnd
>
> [1] https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/arnd/asm-generic.git/
--
- Arnaldo
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] perf arm64: Fix mksyscalltbl, don't lose syscalls due to sort -nu
@ 2022-12-02 18:39 ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
0 siblings, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread
From: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo @ 2022-12-02 18:39 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Arnd Bergmann
Cc: Leo Yan, Vincent Whitchurch, Hans-Peter Nilsson, linux-arm-kernel,
linux-kernel, John Garry, Will Deacon, Mathieu Poirier,
Peter Zijlstra, Ingo Molnar, Mark Rutland, Alexander Shishkin,
Jiri Olsa, Namhyung Kim, Kim Phillips
Em Fri, Nov 25, 2022 at 02:56:31PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann escreveu:
> On Fri, Nov 25, 2022, at 13:54, Leo Yan wrote:
> > On Fri, Nov 25, 2022 at 12:53:10PM +0100, Vincent Whitchurch wrote:
>
> >> It looks like this patch was never applied? AFAICS it is still needed
> >> on current HEAD and it still applies cleanly.
> >
> > Thanks a lot for bringing up this.
> >
> > Before there have a discussion [1] for refactoring Arm64 system call
> > table but it didn't really happen.
>
> I actually worked on this last week and did a new series to convert
> the old asm-generic/unistd.h header into the syscall.tbl format,
> and change arm64 to use that.
>
> You can find my work in the 'syscall-tbl' branch of my asm-generic
> tree [1]. This has only seen light build testing so far, and is
> probably still buggy, but most of the work is there. The missing
> bits are the Makefiles for the other seven architectures using
> asm-generic/unistd.h, and checking the output to ensure the
> contents are still the same.
>
> > I think it's the right thing to merge
> > this patch, @Arnaldo, could you pick up this patch?
>
> That sounds fine to me.
Sure, and adding an Acked-by: Arnd
> Arnd
>
> [1] https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/arnd/asm-generic.git/
--
- Arnaldo
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] perf arm64: Fix mksyscalltbl, don't lose syscalls due to sort -nu
2022-11-25 13:56 ` Arnd Bergmann
@ 2022-12-12 10:52 ` Leo Yan
-1 siblings, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread
From: Leo Yan @ 2022-12-12 10:52 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Arnd Bergmann
Cc: Vincent Whitchurch, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo, Hans-Peter Nilsson,
linux-arm-kernel, linux-kernel, John Garry, Will Deacon,
Mathieu Poirier, Peter Zijlstra, Ingo Molnar, Mark Rutland,
Alexander Shishkin, Jiri Olsa, Namhyung Kim, Kim Phillips
Hi Arnd,
On Fri, Nov 25, 2022 at 02:56:31PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 25, 2022, at 13:54, Leo Yan wrote:
> > On Fri, Nov 25, 2022 at 12:53:10PM +0100, Vincent Whitchurch wrote:
>
> >> It looks like this patch was never applied? AFAICS it is still needed
> >> on current HEAD and it still applies cleanly.
> >
> > Thanks a lot for bringing up this.
> >
> > Before there have a discussion [1] for refactoring Arm64 system call
> > table but it didn't really happen.
>
> I actually worked on this last week and did a new series to convert
> the old asm-generic/unistd.h header into the syscall.tbl format,
> and change arm64 to use that.
>
> You can find my work in the 'syscall-tbl' branch of my asm-generic
> tree [1]. This has only seen light build testing so far, and is
> probably still buggy, but most of the work is there. The missing
> bits are the Makefiles for the other seven architectures using
> asm-generic/unistd.h, and checking the output to ensure the
> contents are still the same.
Thanks a lot for sharing the patch set.
I went through the whole patch set, below are several things I observed:
- I did a quick compilation but found building failure, this failure
is caused by the first patch "arm64: convert unistd_32.h to
syscall.tbl format", it removes the macro __NR_compat_syscalls.
In file included from ./include/vdso/const.h:5,
from ./include/linux/const.h:4,
from ./arch/arm64/include/asm/alternative-macros.h:5,
from ./arch/arm64/include/asm/alternative.h:5,
from ./arch/arm64/include/asm/lse.h:15,
from ./arch/arm64/include/asm/cmpxchg.h:14,
from ./arch/arm64/include/asm/atomic.h:16,
from ./include/linux/atomic.h:7,
from ./include/linux/refcount.h:95,
from kernel/seccomp.c:18:
./arch/arm64/include/asm/seccomp.h:27:33: error: ‘__NR_compat_syscalls’ undeclared here (not in a function); did you mean ‘in_compat_syscall’?
27 | # define SECCOMP_ARCH_COMPAT_NR __NR_compat_syscalls
| ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
./include/uapi/linux/const.h:34:40: note: in definition of macro ‘__KERNEL_DIV_ROUND_UP’
34 | #define __KERNEL_DIV_ROUND_UP(n, d) (((n) + (d) - 1) / (d))
| ^
./include/linux/types.h:11:28: note: in expansion of macro ‘BITS_TO_LONGS’
11 | unsigned long name[BITS_TO_LONGS(bits)]
| ^~~~~~~~~~~~~
kernel/seccomp.c:168:9: note: in expansion of macro ‘DECLARE_BITMAP’
168 | DECLARE_BITMAP(allow_compat, SECCOMP_ARCH_COMPAT_NR);
| ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~
kernel/seccomp.c:168:38: note: in expansion of macro ‘SECCOMP_ARCH_COMPAT_NR’
168 | DECLARE_BITMAP(allow_compat, SECCOMP_ARCH_COMPAT_NR);
| ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
- The patch set breaks git bisection, when I use "git bisect" I can
find more building failures caused by middle patches.
- The patch "arm64: generate 64-bit syscall.tbl" removes macros:
__ARCH_WANT_RENAMEAT
__ARCH_WANT_NEW_STAT
__ARCH_WANT_SET_GET_RLIMIT
__ARCH_WANT_TIME32_SYSCALLS
__ARCH_WANT_SYS_CLONE3
__ARCH_WANT_MEMFD_SECRET
Seems to me we still need to enable these macros so can enable Arm64
specific system calls?
- We also need to update the header files:
tools/include/uapi/asm-generic/unistd.h
You are welcome to CC me when you send out formal patches to mailing
list and I can test it (and look if can refine perf code for this).
Thanks,
Leo
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH] perf arm64: Fix mksyscalltbl, don't lose syscalls due to sort -nu
@ 2022-12-12 10:52 ` Leo Yan
0 siblings, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread
From: Leo Yan @ 2022-12-12 10:52 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Arnd Bergmann
Cc: Vincent Whitchurch, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo, Hans-Peter Nilsson,
linux-arm-kernel, linux-kernel, John Garry, Will Deacon,
Mathieu Poirier, Peter Zijlstra, Ingo Molnar, Mark Rutland,
Alexander Shishkin, Jiri Olsa, Namhyung Kim, Kim Phillips
Hi Arnd,
On Fri, Nov 25, 2022 at 02:56:31PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 25, 2022, at 13:54, Leo Yan wrote:
> > On Fri, Nov 25, 2022 at 12:53:10PM +0100, Vincent Whitchurch wrote:
>
> >> It looks like this patch was never applied? AFAICS it is still needed
> >> on current HEAD and it still applies cleanly.
> >
> > Thanks a lot for bringing up this.
> >
> > Before there have a discussion [1] for refactoring Arm64 system call
> > table but it didn't really happen.
>
> I actually worked on this last week and did a new series to convert
> the old asm-generic/unistd.h header into the syscall.tbl format,
> and change arm64 to use that.
>
> You can find my work in the 'syscall-tbl' branch of my asm-generic
> tree [1]. This has only seen light build testing so far, and is
> probably still buggy, but most of the work is there. The missing
> bits are the Makefiles for the other seven architectures using
> asm-generic/unistd.h, and checking the output to ensure the
> contents are still the same.
Thanks a lot for sharing the patch set.
I went through the whole patch set, below are several things I observed:
- I did a quick compilation but found building failure, this failure
is caused by the first patch "arm64: convert unistd_32.h to
syscall.tbl format", it removes the macro __NR_compat_syscalls.
In file included from ./include/vdso/const.h:5,
from ./include/linux/const.h:4,
from ./arch/arm64/include/asm/alternative-macros.h:5,
from ./arch/arm64/include/asm/alternative.h:5,
from ./arch/arm64/include/asm/lse.h:15,
from ./arch/arm64/include/asm/cmpxchg.h:14,
from ./arch/arm64/include/asm/atomic.h:16,
from ./include/linux/atomic.h:7,
from ./include/linux/refcount.h:95,
from kernel/seccomp.c:18:
./arch/arm64/include/asm/seccomp.h:27:33: error: ‘__NR_compat_syscalls’ undeclared here (not in a function); did you mean ‘in_compat_syscall’?
27 | # define SECCOMP_ARCH_COMPAT_NR __NR_compat_syscalls
| ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
./include/uapi/linux/const.h:34:40: note: in definition of macro ‘__KERNEL_DIV_ROUND_UP’
34 | #define __KERNEL_DIV_ROUND_UP(n, d) (((n) + (d) - 1) / (d))
| ^
./include/linux/types.h:11:28: note: in expansion of macro ‘BITS_TO_LONGS’
11 | unsigned long name[BITS_TO_LONGS(bits)]
| ^~~~~~~~~~~~~
kernel/seccomp.c:168:9: note: in expansion of macro ‘DECLARE_BITMAP’
168 | DECLARE_BITMAP(allow_compat, SECCOMP_ARCH_COMPAT_NR);
| ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~
kernel/seccomp.c:168:38: note: in expansion of macro ‘SECCOMP_ARCH_COMPAT_NR’
168 | DECLARE_BITMAP(allow_compat, SECCOMP_ARCH_COMPAT_NR);
| ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
- The patch set breaks git bisection, when I use "git bisect" I can
find more building failures caused by middle patches.
- The patch "arm64: generate 64-bit syscall.tbl" removes macros:
__ARCH_WANT_RENAMEAT
__ARCH_WANT_NEW_STAT
__ARCH_WANT_SET_GET_RLIMIT
__ARCH_WANT_TIME32_SYSCALLS
__ARCH_WANT_SYS_CLONE3
__ARCH_WANT_MEMFD_SECRET
Seems to me we still need to enable these macros so can enable Arm64
specific system calls?
- We also need to update the header files:
tools/include/uapi/asm-generic/unistd.h
You are welcome to CC me when you send out formal patches to mailing
list and I can test it (and look if can refine perf code for this).
Thanks,
Leo
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH] perf arm64: Fix mksyscalltbl, don't lose syscalls due to sort -nu
2022-12-12 10:52 ` Leo Yan
@ 2022-12-12 13:42 ` Arnd Bergmann
-1 siblings, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread
From: Arnd Bergmann @ 2022-12-12 13:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Leo Yan
Cc: Vincent Whitchurch, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo, Hans-Peter Nilsson,
linux-arm-kernel, linux-kernel, John Garry, Will Deacon,
Mathieu Poirier, Peter Zijlstra, Ingo Molnar, Mark Rutland,
Alexander Shishkin, Jiri Olsa, Namhyung Kim, Kim Phillips
On Mon, Dec 12, 2022, at 11:52, Leo Yan wrote:
> Hi Arnd,
>
> On Fri, Nov 25, 2022 at 02:56:31PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>> On Fri, Nov 25, 2022, at 13:54, Leo Yan wrote:
>> > On Fri, Nov 25, 2022 at 12:53:10PM +0100, Vincent Whitchurch wrote:
>>
>> >> It looks like this patch was never applied? AFAICS it is still needed
>> >> on current HEAD and it still applies cleanly.
>> >
>> > Thanks a lot for bringing up this.
>> >
>> > Before there have a discussion [1] for refactoring Arm64 system call
>> > table but it didn't really happen.
>>
>> I actually worked on this last week and did a new series to convert
>> the old asm-generic/unistd.h header into the syscall.tbl format,
>> and change arm64 to use that.
>>
>> You can find my work in the 'syscall-tbl' branch of my asm-generic
>> tree [1]. This has only seen light build testing so far, and is
>> probably still buggy, but most of the work is there. The missing
>> bits are the Makefiles for the other seven architectures using
>> asm-generic/unistd.h, and checking the output to ensure the
>> contents are still the same.
>
> Thanks a lot for sharing the patch set.
>
> I went through the whole patch set, below are several things I observed:
Thanks for the review!
> - I did a quick compilation but found building failure, this failure
> is caused by the first patch "arm64: convert unistd_32.h to
> syscall.tbl format", it removes the macro __NR_compat_syscalls.
>
> In file included from ./include/vdso/const.h:5,
> from ./include/linux/const.h:4,
> from ./arch/arm64/include/asm/alternative-macros.h:5,
> from ./arch/arm64/include/asm/alternative.h:5,
> from ./arch/arm64/include/asm/lse.h:15,
> from ./arch/arm64/include/asm/cmpxchg.h:14,
> from ./arch/arm64/include/asm/atomic.h:16,
> from ./include/linux/atomic.h:7,
> from ./include/linux/refcount.h:95,
> from kernel/seccomp.c:18:
> ./arch/arm64/include/asm/seccomp.h:27:33: error:
> ‘__NR_compat_syscalls’ undeclared here (not in a function); did you
> mean ‘in_compat_syscall’?
> 27 | # define SECCOMP_ARCH_COMPAT_NR __NR_compat_syscalls
> | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> ./include/uapi/linux/const.h:34:40: note: in definition of macro
> ‘__KERNEL_DIV_ROUND_UP’
> 34 | #define __KERNEL_DIV_ROUND_UP(n, d) (((n) + (d) - 1) / (d))
> | ^
> ./include/linux/types.h:11:28: note: in expansion of macro
> ‘BITS_TO_LONGS’
> 11 | unsigned long name[BITS_TO_LONGS(bits)]
> | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~
> kernel/seccomp.c:168:9: note: in expansion of macro ‘DECLARE_BITMAP’
> 168 | DECLARE_BITMAP(allow_compat, SECCOMP_ARCH_COMPAT_NR);
> | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> kernel/seccomp.c:168:38: note: in expansion of macro
> ‘SECCOMP_ARCH_COMPAT_NR’
> 168 | DECLARE_BITMAP(allow_compat, SECCOMP_ARCH_COMPAT_NR);
> | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Sorry about that, I thought I had fixed it already. I'll need to
get back to the series and make sure this works.
> - The patch set breaks git bisection, when I use "git bisect" I can
> find more building failures caused by middle patches.
Ok, I'll check these out as well.
> - The patch "arm64: generate 64-bit syscall.tbl" removes macros:
>
> __ARCH_WANT_RENAMEAT
> __ARCH_WANT_NEW_STAT
> __ARCH_WANT_SET_GET_RLIMIT
> __ARCH_WANT_TIME32_SYSCALLS
> __ARCH_WANT_SYS_CLONE3
> __ARCH_WANT_MEMFD_SECRET
>
> Seems to me we still need to enable these macros so can enable Arm64
> specific system calls?
The system call selection is now controlled with the line
ABIS_unistd64.h := common,64,renameat,newstat,rlimit,mmu,clone3,memfd_secret
which picks the types of ABIs that are enabled when converting
the syscall.tbl file into the headers. Removing these was
intentional, but I now see that we still need to define __ARCH_WANT_NEW_STAT
and __ARCH_WANT_SYS_CLONE3 because those two are referenced not
just in unistd.h but also in fs/stat.c and kernel/fork.c.
I'll put this on the list of things to check for the other architectures,
in addition to comparing the resulting syscall table object and the
generated asm/unistd.h.
> - We also need to update the header files:
> tools/include/uapi/asm-generic/unistd.h
>
> You are welcome to CC me when you send out formal patches to mailing
> list and I can test it (and look if can refine perf code for this).
Ok, thanks again.
Arnd
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH] perf arm64: Fix mksyscalltbl, don't lose syscalls due to sort -nu
@ 2022-12-12 13:42 ` Arnd Bergmann
0 siblings, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread
From: Arnd Bergmann @ 2022-12-12 13:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Leo Yan
Cc: Vincent Whitchurch, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo, Hans-Peter Nilsson,
linux-arm-kernel, linux-kernel, John Garry, Will Deacon,
Mathieu Poirier, Peter Zijlstra, Ingo Molnar, Mark Rutland,
Alexander Shishkin, Jiri Olsa, Namhyung Kim, Kim Phillips
On Mon, Dec 12, 2022, at 11:52, Leo Yan wrote:
> Hi Arnd,
>
> On Fri, Nov 25, 2022 at 02:56:31PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>> On Fri, Nov 25, 2022, at 13:54, Leo Yan wrote:
>> > On Fri, Nov 25, 2022 at 12:53:10PM +0100, Vincent Whitchurch wrote:
>>
>> >> It looks like this patch was never applied? AFAICS it is still needed
>> >> on current HEAD and it still applies cleanly.
>> >
>> > Thanks a lot for bringing up this.
>> >
>> > Before there have a discussion [1] for refactoring Arm64 system call
>> > table but it didn't really happen.
>>
>> I actually worked on this last week and did a new series to convert
>> the old asm-generic/unistd.h header into the syscall.tbl format,
>> and change arm64 to use that.
>>
>> You can find my work in the 'syscall-tbl' branch of my asm-generic
>> tree [1]. This has only seen light build testing so far, and is
>> probably still buggy, but most of the work is there. The missing
>> bits are the Makefiles for the other seven architectures using
>> asm-generic/unistd.h, and checking the output to ensure the
>> contents are still the same.
>
> Thanks a lot for sharing the patch set.
>
> I went through the whole patch set, below are several things I observed:
Thanks for the review!
> - I did a quick compilation but found building failure, this failure
> is caused by the first patch "arm64: convert unistd_32.h to
> syscall.tbl format", it removes the macro __NR_compat_syscalls.
>
> In file included from ./include/vdso/const.h:5,
> from ./include/linux/const.h:4,
> from ./arch/arm64/include/asm/alternative-macros.h:5,
> from ./arch/arm64/include/asm/alternative.h:5,
> from ./arch/arm64/include/asm/lse.h:15,
> from ./arch/arm64/include/asm/cmpxchg.h:14,
> from ./arch/arm64/include/asm/atomic.h:16,
> from ./include/linux/atomic.h:7,
> from ./include/linux/refcount.h:95,
> from kernel/seccomp.c:18:
> ./arch/arm64/include/asm/seccomp.h:27:33: error:
> ‘__NR_compat_syscalls’ undeclared here (not in a function); did you
> mean ‘in_compat_syscall’?
> 27 | # define SECCOMP_ARCH_COMPAT_NR __NR_compat_syscalls
> | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> ./include/uapi/linux/const.h:34:40: note: in definition of macro
> ‘__KERNEL_DIV_ROUND_UP’
> 34 | #define __KERNEL_DIV_ROUND_UP(n, d) (((n) + (d) - 1) / (d))
> | ^
> ./include/linux/types.h:11:28: note: in expansion of macro
> ‘BITS_TO_LONGS’
> 11 | unsigned long name[BITS_TO_LONGS(bits)]
> | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~
> kernel/seccomp.c:168:9: note: in expansion of macro ‘DECLARE_BITMAP’
> 168 | DECLARE_BITMAP(allow_compat, SECCOMP_ARCH_COMPAT_NR);
> | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> kernel/seccomp.c:168:38: note: in expansion of macro
> ‘SECCOMP_ARCH_COMPAT_NR’
> 168 | DECLARE_BITMAP(allow_compat, SECCOMP_ARCH_COMPAT_NR);
> | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Sorry about that, I thought I had fixed it already. I'll need to
get back to the series and make sure this works.
> - The patch set breaks git bisection, when I use "git bisect" I can
> find more building failures caused by middle patches.
Ok, I'll check these out as well.
> - The patch "arm64: generate 64-bit syscall.tbl" removes macros:
>
> __ARCH_WANT_RENAMEAT
> __ARCH_WANT_NEW_STAT
> __ARCH_WANT_SET_GET_RLIMIT
> __ARCH_WANT_TIME32_SYSCALLS
> __ARCH_WANT_SYS_CLONE3
> __ARCH_WANT_MEMFD_SECRET
>
> Seems to me we still need to enable these macros so can enable Arm64
> specific system calls?
The system call selection is now controlled with the line
ABIS_unistd64.h := common,64,renameat,newstat,rlimit,mmu,clone3,memfd_secret
which picks the types of ABIs that are enabled when converting
the syscall.tbl file into the headers. Removing these was
intentional, but I now see that we still need to define __ARCH_WANT_NEW_STAT
and __ARCH_WANT_SYS_CLONE3 because those two are referenced not
just in unistd.h but also in fs/stat.c and kernel/fork.c.
I'll put this on the list of things to check for the other architectures,
in addition to comparing the resulting syscall table object and the
generated asm/unistd.h.
> - We also need to update the header files:
> tools/include/uapi/asm-generic/unistd.h
>
> You are welcome to CC me when you send out formal patches to mailing
> list and I can test it (and look if can refine perf code for this).
Ok, thanks again.
Arnd
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] perf arm64: Fix mksyscalltbl, don't lose syscalls due to sort -nu
2022-11-25 13:56 ` Arnd Bergmann
@ 2022-12-21 20:15 ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
-1 siblings, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread
From: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo @ 2022-12-21 20:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Arnd Bergmann
Cc: Leo Yan, Vincent Whitchurch, Hans-Peter Nilsson, linux-arm-kernel,
linux-kernel, John Garry, Will Deacon, Mathieu Poirier,
Peter Zijlstra, Ingo Molnar, Mark Rutland, Alexander Shishkin,
Jiri Olsa, Namhyung Kim, Kim Phillips
Em Fri, Nov 25, 2022 at 02:56:31PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann escreveu:
> On Fri, Nov 25, 2022, at 13:54, Leo Yan wrote:
> > On Fri, Nov 25, 2022 at 12:53:10PM +0100, Vincent Whitchurch wrote:
>
> >> It looks like this patch was never applied? AFAICS it is still needed
> >> on current HEAD and it still applies cleanly.
> >
> > Thanks a lot for bringing up this.
> >
> > Before there have a discussion [1] for refactoring Arm64 system call
> > table but it didn't really happen.
>
> I actually worked on this last week and did a new series to convert
> the old asm-generic/unistd.h header into the syscall.tbl format,
> and change arm64 to use that.
>
> You can find my work in the 'syscall-tbl' branch of my asm-generic
> tree [1]. This has only seen light build testing so far, and is
> probably still buggy, but most of the work is there. The missing
> bits are the Makefiles for the other seven architectures using
> asm-generic/unistd.h, and checking the output to ensure the
> contents are still the same.
>
> > I think it's the right thing to merge
> > this patch, @Arnaldo, could you pick up this patch?
So I'm adding the provided:
Reviewed-by: Leo Yan <leo.yan@linaro.org>
Tested-by: Leo Yan <leo.yan@linaro.org>
> That sounds fine to me.
And taking this as an:
Acked-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
ok?
- Arnaldo
> Arnd
>
> [1] https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/arnd/asm-generic.git/
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] perf arm64: Fix mksyscalltbl, don't lose syscalls due to sort -nu
@ 2022-12-21 20:15 ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
0 siblings, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread
From: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo @ 2022-12-21 20:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Arnd Bergmann
Cc: Leo Yan, Vincent Whitchurch, Hans-Peter Nilsson, linux-arm-kernel,
linux-kernel, John Garry, Will Deacon, Mathieu Poirier,
Peter Zijlstra, Ingo Molnar, Mark Rutland, Alexander Shishkin,
Jiri Olsa, Namhyung Kim, Kim Phillips
Em Fri, Nov 25, 2022 at 02:56:31PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann escreveu:
> On Fri, Nov 25, 2022, at 13:54, Leo Yan wrote:
> > On Fri, Nov 25, 2022 at 12:53:10PM +0100, Vincent Whitchurch wrote:
>
> >> It looks like this patch was never applied? AFAICS it is still needed
> >> on current HEAD and it still applies cleanly.
> >
> > Thanks a lot for bringing up this.
> >
> > Before there have a discussion [1] for refactoring Arm64 system call
> > table but it didn't really happen.
>
> I actually worked on this last week and did a new series to convert
> the old asm-generic/unistd.h header into the syscall.tbl format,
> and change arm64 to use that.
>
> You can find my work in the 'syscall-tbl' branch of my asm-generic
> tree [1]. This has only seen light build testing so far, and is
> probably still buggy, but most of the work is there. The missing
> bits are the Makefiles for the other seven architectures using
> asm-generic/unistd.h, and checking the output to ensure the
> contents are still the same.
>
> > I think it's the right thing to merge
> > this patch, @Arnaldo, could you pick up this patch?
So I'm adding the provided:
Reviewed-by: Leo Yan <leo.yan@linaro.org>
Tested-by: Leo Yan <leo.yan@linaro.org>
> That sounds fine to me.
And taking this as an:
Acked-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
ok?
- Arnaldo
> Arnd
>
> [1] https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/arnd/asm-generic.git/
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] perf arm64: Fix mksyscalltbl, don't lose syscalls due to sort -nu
2022-12-21 20:15 ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
@ 2022-12-21 20:21 ` Arnd Bergmann
-1 siblings, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread
From: Arnd Bergmann @ 2022-12-21 20:21 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
Cc: Leo Yan, Vincent Whitchurch, Hans-Peter Nilsson, linux-arm-kernel,
linux-kernel, John Garry, Will Deacon, Mathieu Poirier,
Peter Zijlstra, Ingo Molnar, Mark Rutland, Alexander Shishkin,
Jiri Olsa, Namhyung Kim, Kim Phillips
On Wed, Dec 21, 2022, at 21:15, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> Em Fri, Nov 25, 2022 at 02:56:31PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann escreveu:
>> On Fri, Nov 25, 2022, at 13:54, Leo Yan wrote:
>> > I think it's the right thing to merge
>> > this patch, @Arnaldo, could you pick up this patch?
>
> So I'm adding the provided:
>
> Reviewed-by: Leo Yan <leo.yan@linaro.org>
> Tested-by: Leo Yan <leo.yan@linaro.org>
>
>
>> That sounds fine to me.
>
> And taking this as an:
>
> Acked-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
>
> ok?
Yes, sounds good.
Arnd
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH] perf arm64: Fix mksyscalltbl, don't lose syscalls due to sort -nu
@ 2022-12-21 20:21 ` Arnd Bergmann
0 siblings, 0 replies; 20+ messages in thread
From: Arnd Bergmann @ 2022-12-21 20:21 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
Cc: Leo Yan, Vincent Whitchurch, Hans-Peter Nilsson, linux-arm-kernel,
linux-kernel, John Garry, Will Deacon, Mathieu Poirier,
Peter Zijlstra, Ingo Molnar, Mark Rutland, Alexander Shishkin,
Jiri Olsa, Namhyung Kim, Kim Phillips
On Wed, Dec 21, 2022, at 21:15, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> Em Fri, Nov 25, 2022 at 02:56:31PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann escreveu:
>> On Fri, Nov 25, 2022, at 13:54, Leo Yan wrote:
>> > I think it's the right thing to merge
>> > this patch, @Arnaldo, could you pick up this patch?
>
> So I'm adding the provided:
>
> Reviewed-by: Leo Yan <leo.yan@linaro.org>
> Tested-by: Leo Yan <leo.yan@linaro.org>
>
>
>> That sounds fine to me.
>
> And taking this as an:
>
> Acked-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
>
> ok?
Yes, sounds good.
Arnd
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 20+ messages in thread