From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: will.deacon@arm.com (Will Deacon)
Date: Fri, 3 Aug 2012 10:02:35 +0100
Subject: [PATCH v5 0/3] Updated Cortex-M3 series
In-Reply-To: <20120803075807.GD2626@pengutronix.de>
References: <1341512035-8173-1-git-send-email-u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de>
 <20120803075807.GD2626@pengutronix.de>
Message-ID: <20120803090235.GA26925@mudshark.cambridge.arm.com>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org

On Fri, Aug 03, 2012 at 08:58:07AM +0100, Uwe Kleine-K?nig wrote:
> Hello,

Hi Uwe,

> On Thu, Jul 05, 2012 at 08:13:52PM +0200, Uwe Kleine-K?nig wrote:
> > Hello,
> > 
> > now that 3.5 is about to come I invested the time to update the
> > beginning of the Cortex-M3 support.
> > 
> > Over all I rebased to v3.5-rc5 and addressed the comments by Russell.
> > 
> > It would be great to get these patches into next early after the merge
> > window for 3.6 closes to get them into 3.7. But I won't argue if they
> > made it into 3.6 ;-)
> Now that v3.6-rc1 is out can these go into next for the next merge
> window?

Last time I looked at the code, patch 3/3 was adding some fairly noisy debug
prints to various syscalls and pieces of signal handling. e.g.:


diff --git a/arch/arm/kernel/sys_arm.c b/arch/arm/kernel/sys_arm.c
index 76cbb05..ea207df 100644
--- a/arch/arm/kernel/sys_arm.c
+++ b/arch/arm/kernel/sys_arm.c
@@ -102,6 +102,7 @@ int kernel_execve(const char *filename,
 	 * We were successful.  We won't be returning to our caller, but
 	 * instead to user space by manipulating the kernel stack.
 	 */
+	pr_info("we were successful\n");
 	asm(	"add	r0, %0, %1\n\t"
 		"mov	r1, %2\n\t"
 		"mov	r2, %3\n\t"


Can we drop these bits please?

Will