On Tue Apr 30, 2024 at 10:51 PM EEST, Haitao Huang wrote:
> With different cgroups, the script starts one or multiple concurrent SGX
> selftests (test_sgx), each to run the unclobbered_vdso_oversubscribed
> test case, which loads an enclave of EPC size equal to the EPC capacity
> available on the
On Thu, 2024-05-02 at 10:09 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
>
> External email : Please do not click links or open attachments until
> you have verified the sender or the content.
> On Thu, 2 May 2024 06:49:18 +
> Tze-nan Wu (吳澤南) wrote:
>
> > Good news, this patch works, the test has
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 03:16:04PM +0300, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> > > > From: "Mike Rapoport
On Thu, 2 May 2024 16:13:59 -0700
"Paul E. McKenney" wrote:
> Very good, and thank you!
>
> I will drop it from RCU as soon as it shows up in either -next or in
> mainline.
Sounds good.
I'm currently working on updates to get into -rc7 and plan to add my next
work on top of that (I know, I
On 1/05/2024 7:51 am, Haitao Huang wrote:
From: Kristen Carlson Accardi
For the global reclaimer to determine if any page available for
reclamation at the global level, it currently only checks for emptiness
of the global LRU. That will be inadequate when pages are tracked in
multiple LRUs,
On Thu, May 02, 2024 at 05:31:00PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Wed, 1 May 2024 20:31:06 -0700
> "Paul E. McKenney" wrote:
>
> > On Thu, May 02, 2024 at 11:05:01AM +0900, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> > > On Wed, 1 May 2024 16:12:37 -0700
> > > "Paul E. McKenney" wrote:
> > >
> > > > Note
It is possible that remote processor is already running before
linux boot or remoteproc platform driver probe. Implement required
remoteproc framework ops to provide resource table address and
connect or disconnect with remote processor in such case.
Signed-off-by: Tanmay Shah
---
AMD-Xilinx zynqmp platform contains on-chip sram memory (OCM).
R5 cores can access OCM and access is faster than DDR memory but slower
than TCM memories available. Sram region can have optional multiple
power-domains.
Signed-off-by: Tanmay Shah
---
drivers/remoteproc/xlnx_r5_remoteproc.c | 221
Attach detach ops are needed to connect to remote processor that is
running before remoteproc driver is probed. Implement remoteproc
framework ops that enables such use case on AMD-Xilinx platforms.
Remote processor can also use On Chip sram Memory (OCM) for various
purpose. For example, for fast
On Thu, 2 May 2024 15:58:53 -0700
Beau Belgrave wrote:
> It's not an issue on the matching/logic. However, you do get an extra
> byte alloc (which doesn't bother me in this edge case).
Figured as much, but since there was no mention of it, I decided to bring
it up.
I'll take this as-is then.
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 03:16:04PM +0300, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> > > From: "Mike Rapoport (IBM)"
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > The patches are also available in
On Mon, Apr 29, 2024 at 09:29:20AM -0700, Luis Chamberlain wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 29, 2024 at 03:16:04PM +0300, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> > From: "Mike Rapoport (IBM)"
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > The patches are also available in git:
> >
On Thu, May 02, 2024 at 05:16:34PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Tue, 23 Apr 2024 16:23:37 +
> Beau Belgrave wrote:
>
> > When the ABI was updated to prevent same name w/different args, it
> > missed an important corner case when fields don't end with a space.
> > Typically, space is
Hi Jiri,
On Thu, May 02, 2024 at 10:13:12PM +0200, Jiri Olsa wrote:
> > You could add a HISTORY section.
>
> ok, IIUC for this syscall it should contain just kernel version where
> it got merged, right?
Yep.
>
> >
> > Have a lovely day!
>
> thanks for review,
> jirka
Thanks for the page.
On Wed, 1 May 2024 20:31:06 -0700
"Paul E. McKenney" wrote:
> On Thu, May 02, 2024 at 11:05:01AM +0900, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> > On Wed, 1 May 2024 16:12:37 -0700
> > "Paul E. McKenney" wrote:
> >
> > > Note that the immediate pressure for this patch should be relieved by the
> > > NAPI
On Tue, 23 Apr 2024 16:23:37 +
Beau Belgrave wrote:
> When the ABI was updated to prevent same name w/different args, it
> missed an important corner case when fields don't end with a space.
> Typically, space is used for fields to help separate them, like
> "u8 field1; u8 field2". If no
On Wed, 17 Apr 2024 11:28:30 +0800
Zheng Yejian wrote:
> diff --git a/kernel/trace/ftrace.c b/kernel/trace/ftrace.c
> index da1710499698..e05d3e3dc06a 100644
> --- a/kernel/trace/ftrace.c
> +++ b/kernel/trace/ftrace.c
> @@ -1581,7 +1581,7 @@ static struct dyn_ftrace *lookup_rec(unsigned long
>
On Thu, May 02, 2024 at 03:43:27PM +0200, Alejandro Colomar wrote:
> Hi Jiri,
>
> On Thu, May 02, 2024 at 02:23:13PM +0200, Jiri Olsa wrote:
> > Adding man page for new uretprobe syscall.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Jiri Olsa
> > ---
> > man2/uretprobe.2 | 45
From: "Steven Rostedt (Google)"
The events directory gets its permissions from the root inode. But this
can cause an inconsistency if the instances directory changes its
permissions, as the permissions of the created directories under it should
inherit the permissions of the instances directory
From: "Steven Rostedt (Google)"
Treat the events directory the same as other directories when it comes to
permissions. The events directory was considered different because it's
dentry is persistent, whereas the other directory dentries are created
when accessed. But the way tracefs now does its
From: "Steven Rostedt (Google)"
There's an inconsistency with the way permissions are handled in tracefs.
Because the permissions are generated when accessed, they default to the
root inode's permission if they were never set by the user. If the user
sets the permissions, then a flag is set and
From: "Steven Rostedt (Google)"
The toplevel events directory is really no different than the events
directory of instances. Having the two be different caused
inconsistencies and made it harder to fix the permissions bugs.
Make all events directories act the same.
Cc: sta...@vger.kernel.org
From: "Steven Rostedt (Google)"
The freeing of eventfs_inode via a kfree_rcu() callback. But the content
of the eventfs_inode was being freed after the last kref. This is
dangerous, as changes are being made that can access the content of an
eventfs_inode from an RCU loop.
Instead of using
From: "Steven Rostedt (Google)"
If the instances directory's permissions were never change, then have it
and its children use the mount point permissions as the default.
Currently, the permissions of instance directories are determined by the
instance directory's permissions itself. But if the
The tracefs and eventfs permissions are created dynamically based
on what the mount point inode has or the instances directory inode has.
But the way it worked had some inconsistencies that could lead to
security issues as the file system is not behaving like admins would
expect.
The files and
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 using syscall instead of the trap
> > on the uretprobe trampoline.
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 using syscall instead of the trap
> on the uretprobe trampoline.
>
> The speed up depends on instruction type that uprobe is installed
> and
On Thu, May 2, 2024 at 5:24 AM Jiri Olsa wrote:
>
> Adding test that adds return uprobe inside 32-bit task
> and verify the return uprobe and attached bpf programs
> get properly executed.
>
> Reviewed-by: Masami Hiramatsu (Google)
> Signed-off-by: Jiri Olsa
> ---
>
On Thu, May 2, 2024 at 5:24 AM Jiri Olsa wrote:
>
> Adding test to verify that when called from outside of the
> trampoline provided by kernel, the uretprobe syscall will cause
> calling process to receive SIGILL signal and the attached bpf
> program is not executed.
>
> Reviewed-by: Masami
On Fri, 12 Apr 2024 16:22:53 +0200, Luca Weiss wrote:
> Add the PBS (Programmable Boot Sequencer) to the list of devices.
>
>
Applied, thanks!
[1/1] dt-bindings: mfd: qcom,spmi-pmic: Add pbs to SPMI device types
commit: a1f3b5edaf18b1c71a537032c4a6537bde2ad5e9
--
Lee Jones [李琼斯]
On Thu, 02 May 2024 11:15:48 -0400
Steven Rostedt wrote:
> +/*
> + * On a remount of tracefs, if UID or GID options are set, then
> + * the mount point inode permissions should be used.
> + * Reset the saved permission flags appropriately.
> + */
> +void eventfs_remount(struct tracefs_inode *ti,
From: "Steven Rostedt (Google)"
The events directory gets its permissions from the root inode. But this
can cause an inconsistency if the instances directory changes its
permissions, as the permissions of the created directories under it should
inherit the permissions of the instances directory
From: "Steven Rostedt (Google)"
Treat the events directory the same as other directories when it comes to
permissions. The events directory was considered different because it's
dentry is persistent, whereas the other directory dentries are created
when accessed. But the way tracefs now does its
The tracefs and eventfs permissions are created dynamically based
on what the mount point inode has or the instances directory inode has.
But the way it worked had some inconsistencies that could lead to
security issues as the file system is not behaving like admins would
expect.
The files and
From: "Steven Rostedt (Google)"
If the instances directory's permissions were never change, then have it
and its children use the mount point permissions as the default.
Currently, the permissions of instance directories are determined by the
instance directory's permissions itself. But if the
From: "Steven Rostedt (Google)"
The toplevel events directory is really no different than the events
directory of instances. Having the two be different caused
inconsistencies and made it harder to fix the permissions bugs.
Make all events directories act the same.
Cc: sta...@vger.kernel.org
From: "Steven Rostedt (Google)"
There's an inconsistency with the way permissions are handled in tracefs.
Because the permissions are generated when accessed, they default to the
root inode's permission if they were never set by the user. If the user
sets the permissions, then a flag is set and
On Thu, 2 May 2024 06:49:18 +
Tze-nan Wu (吳澤南) wrote:
> Good news, this patch works, the test has passed, no more Kasan report
> in my environment.
Great to hear!
>
> my environment:
> arm64 + kasan + swtag based kasan + kernel-6.6.18
>
> Really appreciate, and learn a lot from the
On Thu, 2 May 2024 14:38:32 +0100
Vincent Donnefort wrote:
> > > + while (s < nr_subbufs && p < nr_pages) {
> > > + struct page *page = virt_to_page(cpu_buffer->subbuf_ids[s]);
> > > + int off = 0;
> > > +
> > > + for (; off < (1 << (subbuf_order)); off++, page++) {
> > >
Hi Jiri,
On Thu, May 02, 2024 at 02:23:13PM +0200, Jiri Olsa wrote:
> Adding man page for new uretprobe syscall.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jiri Olsa
> ---
> man2/uretprobe.2 | 45 +
> 1 file changed, 45 insertions(+)
> create mode 100644 man2/uretprobe.2
>
On Thu, May 02, 2024 at 03:30:32PM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> On 30.04.24 13:13, Vincent Donnefort wrote:
> > In preparation for allowing the user-space to map a ring-buffer, add
> > a set of mapping functions:
> >
> >ring_buffer_{map,unmap}()
> >
> > And controls on the ring-buffer:
On 30.04.24 13:13, Vincent Donnefort wrote:
In preparation for allowing the user-space to map a ring-buffer, add
a set of mapping functions:
ring_buffer_{map,unmap}()
And controls on the ring-buffer:
ring_buffer_map_get_reader() /* swap reader and head */
Mapping the ring-buffer also
On 30.04.24 13:13, Vincent Donnefort wrote:
In preparation for the ring-buffer memory mapping, allocate compound
pages for the ring-buffer sub-buffers to enable us to map them to
user-space with vm_insert_pages().
Signed-off-by: Vincent Donnefort
Acked-by: David Hildenbrand
--
Cheers,
On Wed, 1 May 2024 23:56:26 +0900
Masami Hiramatsu (Google) wrote:
> Looks good to me.
>
> Reviewed-by: Masami Hiramatsu (Google)
Thanks Masami,
Although Tze-nan pointed out a issue with this patch.
I just published v2, can you review that one too?
Thanks,
-- Steve
From: "Steven Rostedt (Google)"
Synthetic events create and destroy tracefs files when they are created
and removed. The tracing subsystem has its own file descriptor
representing the state of the events attached to the tracefs files.
There's a race between the eventfs files and this file
Adding man page for new uretprobe syscall.
Signed-off-by: Jiri Olsa
---
man2/uretprobe.2 | 45 +
1 file changed, 45 insertions(+)
create mode 100644 man2/uretprobe.2
diff --git a/man2/uretprobe.2 b/man2/uretprobe.2
new file mode 100644
index
Adding test that adds return uprobe inside 32-bit task
and verify the return uprobe and attached bpf programs
get properly executed.
Reviewed-by: Masami Hiramatsu (Google)
Signed-off-by: Jiri Olsa
---
tools/testing/selftests/bpf/.gitignore| 1 +
tools/testing/selftests/bpf/Makefile
Adding test to verify that when called from outside of the
trampoline provided by kernel, the uretprobe syscall will cause
calling process to receive SIGILL signal and the attached bpf
program is not executed.
Reviewed-by: Masami Hiramatsu (Google)
Signed-off-by: Jiri Olsa
---
Adding test that creates uprobe consumer on uretprobe which changes some
of the registers. Making sure the changed registers are propagated to the
user space when the ureptobe syscall trampoline is used on x86_64.
To be able to do this, adding support to bpf_testmod to create uprobe via
new
On Wed, May 01, 2024 at 11:31:02AM -0400, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Wed, May 01, 2024 at 12:51:51PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 30, 2024 at 12:50:05PM +0200, Tobias Huschle wrote:
<...>
> >
> > I'm still wondering why exactly it is imperative for t2 to preempt t1.
> > Is
Add uretprobe syscall test that compares register values before
and after the uretprobe is hit. It also compares the register
values seen from attached bpf program.
Acked-by: Andrii Nakryiko
Reviewed-by: Masami Hiramatsu (Google)
Signed-off-by: Jiri Olsa
---
tools/include/linux/compiler.h
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 stack with address of the trampoline that contains breakpoint
instruction
Wiring up uretprobe system call, which comes in following changes.
We need to do the wiring before, because the uretprobe implementation
needs the syscall number.
Note at the moment uretprobe syscall is supported only for native
64-bit process.
Reviewed-by: Oleg Nesterov
Reviewed-by: Masami
hi,
as part of the effort on speeding up the uprobes [0] coming with
return uprobe optimization by using syscall instead of the trap
on the uretprobe trampoline.
The speed up depends on instruction type that uprobe is installed
and depends on specific HW type, please check patch 1 for details.
On Wed, May 01, 2024 at 12:51:51PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 30, 2024 at 12:50:05PM +0200, Tobias Huschle wrote:
<...>
> >
> > Let's now assume, that ocassionally, task 2 runs a little bit longer than
> > task 1. In CFS, this means, that task 2 can close the vruntime gap by a
> >
On Fri, 2024-03-01 at 22:02 +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> This patch series fixes several "no previous prototype for "
> warnings when building a kernel for SuperH.
>
> Known issues:
> - The various warnings about cache functions are not yet fixed, but
> I didn't
On Wed, May 01, 2024 at 11:31:02AM -0400, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Wed, May 01, 2024 at 12:51:51PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > I'm still wondering why exactly it is imperative for t2 to preempt t1.
> > Is there some unexpressed serialization / spin-waiting ?
>
>
> I am not sure but I
On 4/12/24 20:37, Tanmay Shah wrote:
Add properties as per new bindings in zynqmp remoteproc node
to represent TCM address and size.
This patch also adds alternative remoteproc node to represent
remoteproc cluster in split mode. By default lockstep mode is
enabled and users should disable it
Hi Geert,
On Thu, 2024-05-02 at 09:03 +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> On Wed, May 1, 2024 at 3:58 PM John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
> wrote:
> > On Wed, 2024-05-01 at 11:12 +0200, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
> > > On Fri, 2024-03-01 at 22:02 +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> > > >
Hi Adrian,
On Wed, May 1, 2024 at 3:58 PM John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
wrote:
> On Wed, 2024-05-01 at 11:12 +0200, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
> > On Fri, 2024-03-01 at 22:02 +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> > > dma_extend(), get_dma_info_by_name(), register_chan_caps(), and
> > >
Hi Adrian,
On Wed, May 1, 2024 at 11:09 AM John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
wrote:
> On Fri, 2024-03-01 at 22:02 +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> > arch/sh/drivers/dma/dma-api.c:164:5: warning: no previous prototype for
> > 'dmac_search_free_channel' [-Wmissing-prototypes]
> >
> >
On Wed, 2024-05-01 at 23:50 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
>
> External email : Please do not click links or open attachments until
> you have verified the sender or the content.
> On Thu, 2 May 2024 03:10:24 +
> Tze-nan Wu (吳澤南) wrote:
>
> > >
> > Sorry for my late reply, I'm
62 matches
Mail list logo
