Hello,
On Thu, 18 Apr 2024, Alexander Mikhalitsyn wrote:
> Let's make all IPVS sysctls writtable even when
> network namespace is owned by non-initial user namespace.
>
> Let's make a few sysctls to be read-only for non-privileged users:
> - sync_qlen_max
> - sync_sock_size
> -
On 12/31/23 23:14, Waiman Long wrote:
On 12/31/23 16:55, David Laight wrote:
per_cpu_ptr() indexes __per_cpu_offset[] with the cpu number.
This requires the cpu number be 64bit.
However the value is osq_lock() comes from a 32bit xchg() and there
isn't a way of telling gcc the high bits are
On Fri, May 03, 2024 at 01:34:53PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, May 02, 2024 at 02:23:08PM +0200, Jiri Olsa wrote:
> > Adding uretprobe syscall instead of trap to speed up return probe.
> >
> > At the moment the uretprobe setup/path is:
> >
> > - install entry uprobe
> >
> > -
From: Waiman Long
> Sent: 03 May 2024 17:00
> To: David Laight ; 'linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org'
> ker...@vger.kernel.org>; 'pet...@infradead.org'
> Cc: 'mi...@redhat.com' ; 'w...@kernel.org'
> ; 'boqun.f...@gmail.com'
> ; 'Linus Torvalds' ;
> 'virtualization@lists.linux-
> foundation.org' ;
On Thu, May 02, 2024 at 02:23:08PM +0200, Jiri Olsa wrote:
> Adding uretprobe syscall instead of trap to speed up return probe.
>
> At the moment the uretprobe setup/path is:
>
> - install entry uprobe
>
> - when the uprobe is hit, it overwrites probed function's return address
> on
On Fri, 2024-05-03 at 15:04 +0200, Jiri Olsa wrote:
> On Fri, May 03, 2024 at 01:34:53PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Thu, May 02, 2024 at 02:23:08PM +0200, Jiri Olsa wrote:
> > > Adding uretprobe syscall instead of trap to speed up return probe.
> > >
> > > At the moment the uretprobe
On Fri, May 03, 2024 at 11:03:24AM -0700, Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
> On Thu, May 2, 2024 at 1:04 PM Jiri Olsa wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, May 02, 2024 at 09:43:02AM -0700, Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
> > > On Thu, May 2, 2024 at 5:23 AM Jiri Olsa wrote:
> > > >
> > > > hi,
> > > > as part of the effort on
On Thu, May 2, 2024 at 1:04 PM Jiri Olsa wrote:
>
> On Thu, May 02, 2024 at 09:43:02AM -0700, Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
> > On Thu, May 2, 2024 at 5:23 AM Jiri Olsa wrote:
> > >
> > > hi,
> > > as part of the effort on speeding up the uprobes [0] coming with
> > > return uprobe optimization by
Hi Feng,
During testing, a kernel bug was identified with the suspend/resume
functionality on instances running in a public cloud [0]. This bug is a
regression introduced in v6.8-rc1. After a kernel bisect, the following
commit was identified as the cause of the regression:
+Some more shadow stack folks from other archs. We are discussing how uretprobes
work with shadow stack.
Context:
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/ZjU4ganRF1Cbiug6@krava/
On Fri, 2024-05-03 at 21:18 +0200, Jiri Olsa wrote:
>
> hack below seems to fix it for the current uprobe setup,
> we need
On Fri, 2024-05-03 at 22:17 +0200, Jiri Olsa wrote:
> when uretprobe is created, kernel overwrites the return address on user
> stack to point to user space trampoline, so the setup is in kernel hands
I mean for uprobes in general. I'm didn't have any specific ideas in mind, but
in general when
On 5/3/24 17:10, David Laight wrote:
From: Waiman Long
Sent: 03 May 2024 17:00
...
David,
Could you respin the series based on the latest upstream code?
I've just reapplied the patches to 'master' and they all apply
cleanly and diffing the new patches to the old ones gives no differences.
On Fri, May 03, 2024 at 07:38:18PM +, Edgecombe, Rick P wrote:
> +Some more shadow stack folks from other archs. We are discussing how
> uretprobes
> work with shadow stack.
>
> Context:
> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/ZjU4ganRF1Cbiug6@krava/
>
> On Fri, 2024-05-03 at 21:18 +0200, Jiri Olsa
From: Waiman Long
> Sent: 03 May 2024 17:00
...
> David,
>
> Could you respin the series based on the latest upstream code?
I've just reapplied the patches to 'master' and they all apply
cleanly and diffing the new patches to the old ones gives no differences.
So I think they should still apply.
On Fri, May 03, 2024 at 03:53:15PM +, Edgecombe, Rick P wrote:
> On Fri, 2024-05-03 at 15:04 +0200, Jiri Olsa wrote:
> > On Fri, May 03, 2024 at 01:34:53PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > On Thu, May 02, 2024 at 02:23:08PM +0200, Jiri Olsa wrote:
> > > > Adding uretprobe syscall instead of
On Fri, May 03, 2024 at 07:38:18PM +, Edgecombe, Rick P wrote:
+Some more shadow stack folks from other archs. We are discussing how uretprobes
work with shadow stack.
Context:
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/ZjU4ganRF1Cbiug6@krava/
Thanks Rick.
Yeah I didn't give enough attention to
On Fri, May 03, 2024 at 01:23:30AM +0100, Liviu Dudau wrote:
> On Thu, May 02, 2024 at 04:07:05PM -0700, Luis Chamberlain wrote:
> > On Thu, May 02, 2024 at 11:50:36PM +0100, Liviu Dudau wrote:
> > > On Mon, Apr 29, 2024 at 09:29:20AM -0700, Luis Chamberlain wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Apr 29, 2024 at
Currently, Qualcomm Minidump is being used to collect mini version of
remoteproc coredump with the help of boot firmware however, Minidump
as a feature is not limited to be used only for remote processor and
can also be used for Application processors. So, in preparation of
using it move the
On 4/30/2024 7:08 PM, Bjorn Andersson wrote:
On Tue, Mar 26, 2024 at 07:43:12PM +0530, Mukesh Ojha wrote:
Add qcom_rproc_minidump module in a preparation to remove
minidump specific code from driver/remoteproc/qcom_common.c
and provide needed exported API, this as well helps to
abstract
On Fri, May 03, 2024 at 09:28:25AM +0300, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> On Fri, May 03, 2024 at 01:23:30AM +0100, Liviu Dudau wrote:
> > On Thu, May 02, 2024 at 04:07:05PM -0700, Luis Chamberlain wrote:
> > > On Thu, May 02, 2024 at 11:50:36PM +0100, Liviu Dudau wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Apr 29, 2024 at
20 matches
Mail list logo
