From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from wout4-smtp.messagingengine.com (wout4-smtp.messagingengine.com [64.147.123.20]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1A18548CC1; Wed, 10 Jan 2024 13:42:45 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=arndb.de Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=arndb.de Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=arndb.de header.i=@arndb.de header.b="FSYSViSC"; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.b="LjMJGc5c" Received: from compute5.internal (compute5.nyi.internal [10.202.2.45]) by mailout.west.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id B169B3200B40; Wed, 10 Jan 2024 08:42:44 -0500 (EST) Received: from imap51 ([10.202.2.101]) by compute5.internal (MEProxy); Wed, 10 Jan 2024 08:42:45 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=arndb.de; h=cc :cc:content-type:content-type:date:date:from:from:in-reply-to :in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references:reply-to:subject :subject:to:to; s=fm2; t=1704894164; x=1704980564; bh=BmHdlujemK Tt47oYKjP4mcCwFNBw0dvdYdm7mWMOS1A=; b=FSYSViSC2HmmHEdU8iG/Pm0B7/ 0lVOCBmFGOdxzFynNzEiZvBT8791kHGkqdqHs+89oyxPyMg368ySC5F9AQ5zDkwp eyWZf8uk6JVHrewvLbam2aCpBF5K5+epVbNpGOlYgrxTavqZ4i8VcJb6vmxxeUzw TdA7VIWudKtw7yNWv+WBRBgouGRg9284T5kKWipb7Y9l0In0ewObfvWrAGdhKWzD ZLNj22wVCzlthWStObyo3/KCOCGZwyMs+zdF2GK+jCzWP35V3O0FPonsBQyO90Du Pqzrr6YazJwsANqD/VoZVNMDddWKBNycQe5zF0WbTv08AFkC5v1Q8qAlGeIQ== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:cc:content-type:content-type:date:date :feedback-id:feedback-id:from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:reply-to:subject:subject:to :to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s= fm2; t=1704894164; x=1704980564; bh=BmHdlujemKTt47oYKjP4mcCwFNBw 0dvdYdm7mWMOS1A=; b=LjMJGc5c26PEODjc+KnVJFpKLhBmcZ19hhMC4c1gFy1d rE/35yB6KiE/dCZQ+muUF4XLzD/hXpNRXMWZKpPRk9zd+SsqaUYbKeE+8UziqxJT 1NG37LUqmIPdafSVCpj5TjRKK18bG7JR9ynPM6HRBuGIR6iYaFOuufEfDagcVg8u VT3sSrYzkho/T988ODuWwRsZrTf4mLReUeHvjLd3aDd43Q6mO3MJYey6iV3941We ev3YhRCT2Wuw/UniDSaTx1X3GO4sGrLkj8URVqidhzyc8IilQZvhl5R5Zk9JGX1S 9Gxxuj9Qhdnm/IMedil8usV3JjCP6P6qxAC6dJGRiQ== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedvkedrvdeiuddgheegucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurhepofgfggfkjghffffhvfevufgtsehttdertderredtnecuhfhrohhmpedftehr nhguuceuvghrghhmrghnnhdfuceorghrnhgusegrrhhnuggsrdguvgeqnecuggftrfgrth htvghrnhepvefhffeltdegheeffffhtdegvdehjedtgfekueevgfduffettedtkeekueef hedunecuffhomhgrihhnpehkvghrnhgvlhdrohhrghenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpe dtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpegrrhhnugesrghrnhgusgdruggv X-ME-Proxy: Feedback-ID: i56a14606:Fastmail Received: by mailuser.nyi.internal (Postfix, from userid 501) id A3DC5B6008D; Wed, 10 Jan 2024 08:42:43 -0500 (EST) X-Mailer: MessagingEngine.com Webmail Interface User-Agent: Cyrus-JMAP/3.9.0-alpha0-1364-ga51d5fd3b7-fm-20231219.001-ga51d5fd3 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-api@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <6c82c4b9-297d-44a0-87dc-9413e15fa48a@app.fastmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20240110130122.3836513-1-nik.borisov@suse.com> References: <20240110130122.3836513-1-nik.borisov@suse.com> Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2024 14:42:22 +0100 From: "Arnd Bergmann" To: "Nikolay Borisov" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org Cc: linux-api@vger.kernel.org, "Richard Palethorpe" Subject: Re: [PATCH RESEND] x86/entry/ia32: Ensure s32 is sign extended to s64 Content-Type: text/plain On Wed, Jan 10, 2024, at 14:01, Nikolay Borisov wrote: > > This patch has been sent previously by Richard back in 2021 [0]. > However it > seems to have been dropped at some point and never merged. So I'm > resending again > to consider it for merging given that io_pgetevents_time64 LTP test > still fails. > > > [0] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20210927161955.28494-1-rpalethorpe@suse.com/ Thank you for resending this, I hadn't noticed that this never went in, but I also see that I still keep the same patch in my testing tree. I think the entire syscall entry logic needs a larger cross-architecture overhaul to avoid these confusing macros and make sure we get it right everywhere, but that's not going to happen overnight, so this patch is what should get merged and backported to LTS kernels first. arnd