Re: [PATCH v3 01/28] regset: Add support for dynamically sized regsets

Dave Martin
2017-10-11T14:45:07Z

On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 03:14:10PM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 10, 2017 at 07:38:18PM +0100, Dave P Martin wrote:
> > Currently the regset API doesn't allow for the possibility that
> > regsets (or at least, the amount of meaningful data in a regset)
> > may change in size.
> >
> > In particular, this results in useless padding being added to
> > coredumps in a regset's current size is smaller than its
> > theoretical maximum size.
> >
> > This patch adds a get_size() function to struct user_regset.
> > Individual regset implementations can implement this function to
> > return the current size of the regset data. A regset_size()
> > function is added to provide callers with an abstract interface for
> > determining the size of a regset without needing to know whether
> > the regset is dynamically sized or not.
> >
> > The only affected user of this interface is the ELF coredump code:
> > This patch ports ELF coredump to dump regsets with their actual
> > size in the coredump. This has no effect except for new regsets
> > that are dynamically sized and provide a get_size() implementation.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Dave Martin <Dave.Martin@arm.com>
> > Reviewed-by: Alex Bennée <alex.bennee@linaro.org>
> > ---
> > fs/binfmt_elf.c | 6 ++---
> > include/linux/regset.h | 67 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------
> > 2 files changed, 63 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>
> The patch looks fine to me:
>
> Reviewed-by: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
>
> However, you'd probably need an ack from the filesystem maintainers
> (cc'ed; patch below for reference).

Apologies for that -- I manually added Ccs to this patch in previous
postings, and predictably lost them in the respin.

I'll add Cc lines in the commit message, since there will be a
further re-spin of the series to apply the Documentation changes
requested by Szabolcs that I missed.

I don't currently have any pending fixes to _this_ patch, so it's still
worth reviewing.

Cheers
---Dave …