Christophe Leroy <christophe.le...@csgroup.eu> writes:
> Le 25/11/2020 à 06:16, Aneesh Kumar K.V a écrit :
....
> +++ b/arch/powerpc/kernel/process.c
>> @@ -1530,10 +1530,32 @@ void flush_thread(void)
>> #ifdef CONFIG_PPC_BOOK3S_64
>> void arch_setup_new_exec(void)
>> {
>> - if (radix_enabled())
>> - return;
>> - hash__setup_new_exec();
>> + if (!radix_enabled())
>> + hash__setup_new_exec();
>> +
>> + /*
>> + * If we exec out of a kernel thread then thread.regs will not be
>> + * set. Do it now.
>> + */
>> + if (!current->thread.regs) {
>> + struct pt_regs *regs = task_stack_page(current) + THREAD_SIZE;
>> + current->thread.regs = regs - 1;
>> + }
>> +
>> +}
>> +#else
>> +void arch_setup_new_exec(void)
>> +{
>> + /*
>> + * If we exec out of a kernel thread then thread.regs will not be
>> + * set. Do it now.
>> + */
>> + if (!current->thread.regs) {
>> + struct pt_regs *regs = task_stack_page(current) + THREAD_SIZE;
>> + current->thread.regs = regs - 1;
>> + }
>> }
>> +
>> #endif
>
> No need to duplicate arch_setup_new_exec() I think. radix_enabled() is
> defined at all time so the
> first function should be valid at all time.
>
arch/powerpc/kernel/process.c: In function ‘arch_setup_new_exec’:
arch/powerpc/kernel/process.c:1529:3: error: implicit declaration of function
‘hash__setup_new_exec’; did you mean ‘arch_setup_new_exec’?
[-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
1529 | hash__setup_new_exec();
| ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
| arch_setup_new_exec
That requires us to have hash__setup_new_exec prototype for all platforms.
-aneesh
