From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:45923) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZP9uu-00041A-Gl for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 11 Aug 2015 09:48:37 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZP9up-0000Uw-HM for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 11 Aug 2015 09:48:36 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:52205) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZP9up-0000UX-CI for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 11 Aug 2015 09:48:31 -0400 Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2015 15:48:26 +0200 From: Andrea Arcangeli Message-ID: <20150811134826.GI4520@redhat.com> References: <1431624680-20153-1-git-send-email-aarcange@redhat.com> <1431624680-20153-20-git-send-email-aarcange@redhat.com> <20150811100728.GB4587@in.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20150811100728.GB4587@in.ibm.com> Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 19/23] userfaultfd: activate syscall List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Bharata B Rao Cc: Dave Hansen , zhang.zhanghailiang@huawei.com, kvm@vger.kernel.org, Pavel Emelyanov , linux-api@vger.kernel.org, "Kirill A. Shutemov" , Hugh Dickins , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, "Huangpeng (Peter)" , Andres Lagar-Cavilla , Mel Gorman , Johannes Weiner , Paolo Bonzini , Andrew Morton , Sanidhya Kashyap , Linus Torvalds , Andy Lutomirski , "Dr. David Alan Gilbert" , Peter Feiner Hello Bharata, On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 03:37:29PM +0530, Bharata B Rao wrote: > May be it is a bit late to bring this up, but I needed the following fix > to userfault21 branch of your git tree to compile on powerpc. Not late, just in time. I increased the number of syscalls in earlier versions, it must have gotten lost during a rejecting rebase, sorry. I applied it to my tree and it can be applied to -mm and linux-next, thanks! The syscall for arm32 are also ready and on their way to the arm tree, the testsuite worked fine there. ppc also should work fine if you could confirm it'd be interesting, just beware that I got a typo in the testcase: diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/vm/userfaultfd.c b/tools/testing/selftests/vm/userfaultfd.c index 76071b1..925c3c9 100644 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/vm/userfaultfd.c +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/vm/userfaultfd.c @@ -70,7 +70,7 @@ #define __NR_userfaultfd 323 #elif defined(__i386__) #define __NR_userfaultfd 374 -#elif defined(__powewrpc__) +#elif defined(__powerpc__) #define __NR_userfaultfd 364 #else #error "missing __NR_userfaultfd definition" > ---- > > powerpc: Bump up __NR_syscalls to account for __NR_userfaultfd > > From: Bharata B Rao > > With userfaultfd syscall, the number of syscalls will be 365 on PowerPC. > Reflect the same in __NR_syscalls. > > Signed-off-by: Bharata B Rao > --- > arch/powerpc/include/asm/unistd.h | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/unistd.h b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/unistd.h > index f4f8b66..4a055b6 100644 > --- a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/unistd.h > +++ b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/unistd.h > @@ -12,7 +12,7 @@ > #include > > > -#define __NR_syscalls 364 > +#define __NR_syscalls 365 > > #define __NR__exit __NR_exit > #define NR_syscalls __NR_syscalls Reviewed-by: Andrea Arcangeli