* Re: [uml-devel] [PATCH resend] um, hweight: Fix UML boot crash
2010-06-09 8:46 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
@ 2010-06-09 9:08 ` Boaz Harrosh
2010-06-09 9:32 ` Américo Wang
2010-06-09 18:29 ` H. Peter Anvin
2 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: Boaz Harrosh @ 2010-06-09 9:08 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Geert Uytterhoeven
Cc: Borislav Petkov, H. Peter Anvin, Toralf Förster, uml-devel,
linux-kernel, Jeff Dike, Andrew Morton, Rafael J. Wysocki
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
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread* Re: [uml-devel] [PATCH resend] um, hweight: Fix UML boot crash
2010-06-09 8:46 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2010-06-09 9:08 ` Boaz Harrosh
@ 2010-06-09 9:32 ` Américo Wang
2010-06-09 18:29 ` H. Peter Anvin
2 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: Américo Wang @ 2010-06-09 9:32 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Geert Uytterhoeven
Cc: Boaz Harrosh, Borislav Petkov, H. Peter Anvin,
Toralf Förster, uml-devel, linux-kernel, Jeff Dike,
Andrew Morton, Rafael J. Wysocki
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.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: [uml-devel] [PATCH resend] um, hweight: Fix UML boot crash
2010-06-09 8:46 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2010-06-09 9:08 ` Boaz Harrosh
2010-06-09 9:32 ` Américo Wang
@ 2010-06-09 18:29 ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-06-14 16:08 ` Boaz Harrosh
2 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread
From: H. Peter Anvin @ 2010-06-09 18:29 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Geert Uytterhoeven
Cc: Boaz Harrosh, Borislav Petkov, Toralf Förster, uml-devel,
linux-kernel, Jeff Dike, Andrew Morton, Rafael J. Wysocki
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
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: [uml-devel] [PATCH resend] um, hweight: Fix UML boot crash
2010-06-09 18:29 ` H. Peter Anvin
@ 2010-06-14 16:08 ` Boaz Harrosh
2010-06-14 16:41 ` H. Peter Anvin
0 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread
From: Boaz Harrosh @ 2010-06-14 16:08 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: H. Peter Anvin
Cc: Geert Uytterhoeven, Borislav Petkov, Toralf Förster,
uml-devel, linux-kernel, Jeff Dike, Andrew Morton,
Rafael J. Wysocki
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
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: [uml-devel] [PATCH resend] um, hweight: Fix UML boot crash
2010-06-14 16:08 ` Boaz Harrosh
@ 2010-06-14 16:41 ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-06-14 18:18 ` Boaz Harrosh
0 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread
From: H. Peter Anvin @ 2010-06-14 16:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Boaz Harrosh
Cc: Geert Uytterhoeven, Borislav Petkov, Toralf Förster,
uml-devel, linux-kernel, Jeff Dike, Andrew Morton,
Rafael J. Wysocki
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.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: [uml-devel] [PATCH resend] um, hweight: Fix UML boot crash
2010-06-14 16:41 ` H. Peter Anvin
@ 2010-06-14 18:18 ` Boaz Harrosh
0 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: Boaz Harrosh @ 2010-06-14 18:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: H. Peter Anvin
Cc: Geert Uytterhoeven, Borislav Petkov, Toralf Förster,
uml-devel, linux-kernel, Jeff Dike, Andrew Morton,
Rafael J. Wysocki
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
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread