From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt Subject: Re: Re: [opensuse-kernel] libsigsegv build fail with kernel 3.18.3 Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2015 10:50:52 +1100 Message-ID: <1424649052.4980.17.camel@au1.ibm.com> References: <1422361485.6648.71.camel@opensuse.org> <54C78756.9090605@suse.cz> <1422364084.6648.82.camel@opensuse.org> <1422836637.17302.9.camel@au1.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: List-Owner: List-Archive: To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Max Filippov , Takashi Iwai , "linux-arch@vger.kernel.org" , opensuse-factory@opensuse.org, OpenSUSE Kernel Team List-Id: linux-arch.vger.kernel.org On Sun, 2015-02-01 at 17:09 -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Sun, Feb 1, 2015 at 4:23 PM, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > > > > I prefer having the test inside mm_fault_error(), even if that makes the > > patch a bit bigger, it keeps the logic in a single place. Untested > > patch: > > I'm certainly ok with that, but I wanted to make the code that I > wasn't going to compile (much less test) for various architectures be > as simple and straightforward as possible. Ah, I missed your reply ... my fault for using the wrong email address to send my message in the first place :-) > So feel free to send a patch that fixes it up to do it in a single > place after testing it. Ok sure, I'll have a look in the next few days, bogged down with some local emergency right now. > Of course, what I *really* want would be to make a new > "generic_mm_fault()" helper that would do all the normal stuff: > > - find_vma() > - check permissions and ranges > - call 'handle_mm_fault()' > - do the proper error, retry and minor/major fault handling > > and then most architectures could just call that. That would be great ... > Anybody willing to see if they could encapsulate that part of the x86 > code, and make it more widely useful? I say "x86 code", because that's > the most tested one, and I think it gets the odd retry and error cases > right (and minor/major fault counting etc), unlike some. I can try to give it a spin some time this week I think, I can probably do x86, powerpc and arm. Let's see if I manage to not forget :) Cheers, Ben. > Linus > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arch" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from e23smtp01.au.ibm.com ([202.81.31.143]:57570 "EHLO e23smtp01.au.ibm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752107AbbBVXvy (ORCPT ); Sun, 22 Feb 2015 18:51:54 -0500 Received: from /spool/local by e23smtp01.au.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Mon, 23 Feb 2015 09:51:52 +1000 Received: from d23relay07.au.ibm.com (d23relay07.au.ibm.com [9.190.26.37]) by d23dlp02.au.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A9BE52BB0040 for ; Mon, 23 Feb 2015 10:51:49 +1100 (EST) Received: from d23av03.au.ibm.com (d23av03.au.ibm.com [9.190.234.97]) by d23relay07.au.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id t1MNpf3345154522 for ; Mon, 23 Feb 2015 10:51:49 +1100 Received: from d23av03.au.ibm.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by d23av03.au.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.14.4/NCO v10.0 AVout) with ESMTP id t1MNpFl3011282 for ; Mon, 23 Feb 2015 10:51:16 +1100 Message-ID: <1424649052.4980.17.camel@au1.ibm.com> Subject: Re: [opensuse-factory] Re: [opensuse-kernel] libsigsegv build fail with kernel 3.18.3 From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2015 10:50:52 +1100 In-Reply-To: References: <1422361485.6648.71.camel@opensuse.org> <54C78756.9090605@suse.cz> <1422364084.6648.82.camel@opensuse.org> <1422836637.17302.9.camel@au1.ibm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Max Filippov , Takashi Iwai , "linux-arch@vger.kernel.org" , opensuse-factory@opensuse.org, OpenSUSE Kernel Team Message-ID: <20150222235052.G3sxfK3unPjxZCEyEONbc11dqE3hm_YMOW6zs0qlN3w@z> On Sun, 2015-02-01 at 17:09 -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Sun, Feb 1, 2015 at 4:23 PM, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > > > > I prefer having the test inside mm_fault_error(), even if that makes the > > patch a bit bigger, it keeps the logic in a single place. Untested > > patch: > > I'm certainly ok with that, but I wanted to make the code that I > wasn't going to compile (much less test) for various architectures be > as simple and straightforward as possible. Ah, I missed your reply ... my fault for using the wrong email address to send my message in the first place :-) > So feel free to send a patch that fixes it up to do it in a single > place after testing it. Ok sure, I'll have a look in the next few days, bogged down with some local emergency right now. > Of course, what I *really* want would be to make a new > "generic_mm_fault()" helper that would do all the normal stuff: > > - find_vma() > - check permissions and ranges > - call 'handle_mm_fault()' > - do the proper error, retry and minor/major fault handling > > and then most architectures could just call that. That would be great ... > Anybody willing to see if they could encapsulate that part of the x86 > code, and make it more widely useful? I say "x86 code", because that's > the most tested one, and I think it gets the odd retry and error cases > right (and minor/major fault counting etc), unlike some. I can try to give it a spin some time this week I think, I can probably do x86, powerpc and arm. Let's see if I manage to not forget :) Cheers, Ben. > Linus > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arch" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html