[PATCH resend] um, hweight: Fix UML boot crash

[PATCH resend] um, hweight: Fix UML boot crash

[Boaz Harrosh]

From: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>

Obviously UML cannot stomach callee reg-saving trickery
introduced with d61931d89be506372d01a90d1755f6d0a9fafe2d
(x86: Add optimized popcnt variants) and oopses during boot:
http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=127522065202435&w=2

Redirect arch_hweight.h include from the x86 portion to the generic
arch_hweight.h which is a fallback to the software hweight routines.

LKML-Reference: <201005271944.09541.toralf.foerster@gmx.de>
Signed-off-by: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
---
 arch/um/include/asm/arch_hweight.h |    6 ++++++
 1 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
 create mode 100644 arch/um/include/asm/arch_hweight.h

diff --git a/arch/um/include/asm/arch_hweight.h b/arch/um/include/asm/arch_hweight.h
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..c656cf4
--- /dev/null
+++ b/arch/um/include/asm/arch_hweight.h
@@ -0,0 +1,6 @@
+#ifndef _ASM_UM_HWEIGHT_H
+#define _ASM_UM_HWEIGHT_H
+
+#include <asm-generic/bitops/arch_hweight.h>
+
+#endif
-- 1.7.1 

Re: [uml-devel] [PATCH resend] um, hweight: Fix UML boot crash

[Boaz Harrosh]

On 06/09/2010 11:04 AM, Boaz Harrosh wrote:
> From: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
> 
> Obviously UML cannot stomach callee reg-saving trickery
> introduced with d61931d89be506372d01a90d1755f6d0a9fafe2d
> (x86: Add optimized popcnt variants) and oopses during boot:
> http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=127522065202435&w=2
> 
> Redirect arch_hweight.h include from the x86 portion to the generic
> arch_hweight.h which is a fallback to the software hweight routines.
> 
> LKML-Reference: <201005271944.09541.toralf.foerster@gmx.de>
> Signed-off-by: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>

who's going to push this ASAP. I was just (again) 3/4 through a bisect
on 2.6.35-rc2. When I finally realized "Hey that patch, I forgot".
(My concentration is not what it used to be)

Please push this, someone
Boaz

> ---
>  arch/um/include/asm/arch_hweight.h |    6 ++++++
>  1 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>  create mode 100644 arch/um/include/asm/arch_hweight.h
> 
> diff --git a/arch/um/include/asm/arch_hweight.h b/arch/um/include/asm/arch_hweight.h
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000..c656cf4
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/arch/um/include/asm/arch_hweight.h
> @@ -0,0 +1,6 @@
> +#ifndef _ASM_UM_HWEIGHT_H
> +#define _ASM_UM_HWEIGHT_H
> +
> +#include <asm-generic/bitops/arch_hweight.h>
> +
> +#endif
> -- 1.7.1 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> ThinkGeek and WIRED's GeekDad team up for the Ultimate 
> GeekDad Father's Day Giveaway. ONE MASSIVE PRIZE to the 
> lucky parental unit.  See the prize list and enter to win: 
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/thinkgeek-promo
> _______________________________________________
> User-mode-linux-devel mailing list
> User-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/user-mode-linux-devel

Re: [uml-devel] [PATCH resend] um, hweight: Fix UML boot crash

[Geert Uytterhoeven]

On Wed, Jun 9, 2010 at 10:09, Boaz Harrosh <bharrosh@panasas.com> wrote:
> On 06/09/2010 11:04 AM, Boaz Harrosh wrote:
>> From: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
>>
>> Obviously UML cannot stomach callee reg-saving trickery
>> introduced with d61931d89be506372d01a90d1755f6d0a9fafe2d
>> (x86: Add optimized popcnt variants) and oopses during boot:
>> http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=127522065202435&w=2
>>
>> Redirect arch_hweight.h include from the x86 portion to the generic
>> arch_hweight.h which is a fallback to the software hweight routines.
>>
>> LKML-Reference: <201005271944.09541.toralf.foerster@gmx.de>
>> Signed-off-by: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>

Tested-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>

> who's going to push this ASAP. I was just (again) 3/4 through a bisect
> on 2.6.35-rc2. When I finally realized "Hey that patch, I forgot".
> (My concentration is not what it used to be)
>
> Please push this, someone

Peter, are you happy with this?
Although we still don't know why UML cannot grok it, it does fix a
regression in post-2.6.34.

>> ---
>>  arch/um/include/asm/arch_hweight.h |    6 ++++++
>>  1 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>>  create mode 100644 arch/um/include/asm/arch_hweight.h
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/um/include/asm/arch_hweight.h b/arch/um/include/asm/arch_hweight.h
>> new file mode 100644
>> index 0000000..c656cf4
>> --- /dev/null
>> +++ b/arch/um/include/asm/arch_hweight.h
>> @@ -0,0 +1,6 @@
>> +#ifndef _ASM_UM_HWEIGHT_H
>> +#define _ASM_UM_HWEIGHT_H
>> +
>> +#include <asm-generic/bitops/arch_hweight.h>
>> +
>> +#endif

Gr{oetje,eeting}s,

						Geert

--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org

In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
							    -- Linus Torvalds

Re: [uml-devel] [PATCH resend] um, hweight: Fix UML boot crash

[Boaz Harrosh]

On 06/09/2010 11:46 AM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 9, 2010 at 10:09, Boaz Harrosh <bharrosh@panasas.com> wrote:
>> On 06/09/2010 11:04 AM, Boaz Harrosh wrote:
>>> From: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
>>>
>>> Obviously UML cannot stomach callee reg-saving trickery
>>> introduced with d61931d89be506372d01a90d1755f6d0a9fafe2d
>>> (x86: Add optimized popcnt variants) and oopses during boot:
>>> http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=127522065202435&w=2
>>>
>>> Redirect arch_hweight.h include from the x86 portion to the generic
>>> arch_hweight.h which is a fallback to the software hweight routines.
>>>
>>> LKML-Reference: <201005271944.09541.toralf.foerster@gmx.de>
>>> Signed-off-by: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
> 
> Tested-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>

Tested-by: Boaz Harrosh <bharrosh@panasas.com>

> 
>> who's going to push this ASAP. I was just (again) 3/4 through a bisect
>> on 2.6.35-rc2. When I finally realized "Hey that patch, I forgot".
>> (My concentration is not what it used to be)
>>
>> Please push this, someone
> 
> Peter, are you happy with this?
> Although we still don't know why UML cannot grok it, it does fix a
> regression in post-2.6.34.
> 

I have x86_64 setup (host and guest). Without this I'm unable to boot any
UML image (2.6.35-rc2). With it all is well as before.

Boaz
>>> ---
>>>  arch/um/include/asm/arch_hweight.h |    6 ++++++
>>>  1 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>>>  create mode 100644 arch/um/include/asm/arch_hweight.h
>>>
>>> diff --git a/arch/um/include/asm/arch_hweight.h b/arch/um/include/asm/arch_hweight.h
>>> new file mode 100644
>>> index 0000000..c656cf4
>>> --- /dev/null
>>> +++ b/arch/um/include/asm/arch_hweight.h
>>> @@ -0,0 +1,6 @@
>>> +#ifndef _ASM_UM_HWEIGHT_H
>>> +#define _ASM_UM_HWEIGHT_H
>>> +
>>> +#include <asm-generic/bitops/arch_hweight.h>
>>> +
>>> +#endif
> 
> Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
> 
> 						Geert
> 
> --
> Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org
> 
> In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
> when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
> 							    -- Linus Torvalds

Re: [uml-devel] [PATCH resend] um, hweight: Fix UML boot crash

[Américo Wang]

On Wed, Jun 09, 2010 at 10:46:01AM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
>On Wed, Jun 9, 2010 at 10:09, Boaz Harrosh <bharrosh@panasas.com> wrote:
>> On 06/09/2010 11:04 AM, Boaz Harrosh wrote:
>>> From: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
>>>
>>> Obviously UML cannot stomach callee reg-saving trickery
>>> introduced with d61931d89be506372d01a90d1755f6d0a9fafe2d
>>> (x86: Add optimized popcnt variants) and oopses during boot:
>>> http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=127522065202435&w=2
>>>
>>> Redirect arch_hweight.h include from the x86 portion to the generic
>>> arch_hweight.h which is a fallback to the software hweight routines.
>>>
>>> LKML-Reference: <201005271944.09541.toralf.foerster@gmx.de>
>>> Signed-off-by: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
>
>Tested-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>
>
>> who's going to push this ASAP. I was just (again) 3/4 through a bisect
>> on 2.6.35-rc2. When I finally realized "Hey that patch, I forgot".
>> (My concentration is not what it used to be)
>>
>> Please push this, someone
>
>Peter, are you happy with this?
>Although we still don't know why UML cannot grok it, it does fix a
>regression in post-2.6.34.
>

Usually Andrew should take UML patches.

Re: [uml-devel] [PATCH resend] um, hweight: Fix UML boot crash

[Boaz Harrosh]

On 06/09/2010 11:04 AM, Boaz Harrosh wrote:
> From: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
> 
> Obviously UML cannot stomach callee reg-saving trickery
> introduced with d61931d89be506372d01a90d1755f6d0a9fafe2d
> (x86: Add optimized popcnt variants) and oopses during boot:
> http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=127522065202435&w=2
> 
> Redirect arch_hweight.h include from the x86 portion to the generic
> arch_hweight.h which is a fallback to the software hweight routines.
> 

CC: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
> LKML-Reference: <201005271944.09541.toralf.foerster@gmx.de>
> Signed-off-by: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>

Andrew would you please push this patch for 2.6.35-rc3

Thanks
Boaz

> ---
>  arch/um/include/asm/arch_hweight.h |    6 ++++++
>  1 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>  create mode 100644 arch/um/include/asm/arch_hweight.h
> 
> diff --git a/arch/um/include/asm/arch_hweight.h b/arch/um/include/asm/arch_hweight.h
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000..c656cf4
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/arch/um/include/asm/arch_hweight.h
> @@ -0,0 +1,6 @@
> +#ifndef _ASM_UM_HWEIGHT_H
> +#define _ASM_UM_HWEIGHT_H
> +
> +#include <asm-generic/bitops/arch_hweight.h>
> +
> +#endif
> -- 1.7.1 

Re: [uml-devel] [PATCH resend] um, hweight: Fix UML boot crash

[H. Peter Anvin]

On 06/09/2010 01:46 AM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> 
> Peter, are you happy with this?
> Although we still don't know why UML cannot grok it, it does fix a
> regression in post-2.6.34.
> 

Yes, I'll push it.

	-hpa

Re: [uml-devel] [PATCH resend] um, hweight: Fix UML boot crash

[Boaz Harrosh]

On 06/09/2010 09:29 PM, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> On 06/09/2010 01:46 AM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
>>
>> Peter, are you happy with this?
>> Although we still don't know why UML cannot grok it, it does fix a
>> regression in post-2.6.34.
>>
> 
> Yes, I'll push it.
> 
> 	-hpa

Peter hi.

Why have we missed that patch from -rc3. This is so *not fun* to keep
out-of-tree patches. Specially when working with lots of other people's
trees.

Please push it ASAP
Boaz

Re: [uml-devel] [PATCH resend] um, hweight: Fix UML boot crash

[H. Peter Anvin]

On 06/14/2010 09:08 AM, Boaz Harrosh wrote:
> On 06/09/2010 09:29 PM, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>> On 06/09/2010 01:46 AM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
>>>
>>> Peter, are you happy with this?
>>> Although we still don't know why UML cannot grok it, it does fix a
>>> regression in post-2.6.34.
>>>
>>
>> Yes, I'll push it.
>>
>> 	-hpa
> 
> Peter hi.
> 
> Why have we missed that patch from -rc3. This is so *not fun* to keep
> out-of-tree patches. Specially when working with lots of other people's
> trees.
> 
> Please push it ASAP
> Boaz

We made the decision of not pushing our queue for -rc3 because Linus
specifically wanted only critical fixes for -rc3.  We will push it for
-rc4 for when Linus returns.

Also, you may want to consider moderating your tone.

	-hpa

-- 
H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center
I work for Intel.  I don't speak on their behalf.

Re: [uml-devel] [PATCH resend] um, hweight: Fix UML boot crash

[Boaz Harrosh]

On 06/14/2010 07:41 PM, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> On 06/14/2010 09:08 AM, Boaz Harrosh wrote:
>> On 06/09/2010 09:29 PM, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>>> On 06/09/2010 01:46 AM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Peter, are you happy with this?
>>>> Although we still don't know why UML cannot grok it, it does fix a
>>>> regression in post-2.6.34.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Yes, I'll push it.
>>>
>>> 	-hpa
>>
>> Peter hi.
>>
>> Why have we missed that patch from -rc3. This is so *not fun* to keep
>> out-of-tree patches. Specially when working with lots of other people's
>> trees.
>>
>> Please push it ASAP
>> Boaz
> 
> We made the decision of not pushing our queue for -rc3 because Linus
> specifically wanted only critical fixes for -rc3.  We will push it for
> -rc4 for when Linus returns.
> 
> Also, you may want to consider moderating your tone.
> 

I did not meant any disrespect. I totally understand, I meant it as a
a team member, that wants to help. I deeply regret if I offended you
in any way, please forgive me.

And, for My uml it is a very critical, "*can not* boot without", patch.
I wish it could be pushed apart from any other patchset.

Thanks
Boaz

> 	-hpa
>