(request for -mm inclusion) Re: [PATCH v3] arm64, ia64, ppc, s390, sh, tile, um, x86, mm: Remove default gate area
Hi akpm- One more try before I spam the world with a new thread. Is this patch okay for -mm? So far, it's accumulated: Acked-by: Nathan Lynch nathan_ly...@mentor.com Acked-by: H. Peter Anvin h...@linux.intel.com Acked-by: Benjamin Herrenschmidt b...@kernel.crashing.org [in principle] Acked-by: Richard Weinberger rich...@nod.at [for um] Acked-by: Will Deacon will.dea...@arm.com [for arm64] For convenience, I've attached the patch w/ the acked-by's folded in and with no other changes. Thanks, Andy On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 9:53 AM, Andy Lutomirski l...@amacapital.net wrote: On Jul 18, 2014 3:20 AM, Richard Weinberger rich...@nod.at wrote: Am 18.07.2014 12:14, schrieb Will Deacon: On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 03:47:26PM +0100, Andy Lutomirski wrote: On Sun, Jul 13, 2014 at 1:01 PM, Andy Lutomirski l...@amacapital.net wrote: The core mm code will provide a default gate area based on FIXADDR_USER_START and FIXADDR_USER_END if !defined(__HAVE_ARCH_GATE_AREA) defined(AT_SYSINFO_EHDR). This default is only useful for ia64. arm64, ppc, s390, sh, tile, 64-bit UML, and x86_32 have their own code just to disable it. arm, 32-bit UML, and x86_64 have gate areas, but they have their own implementations. This gets rid of the default and moves the code into ia64. This should save some code on architectures without a gate area: it's now possible to inline the gate_area functions in the default case. Can one of you pull this somewhere? Otherwise I can put it somewhere stable and ask for -next inclusion, but that seems like overkill for a single patch. For the um bits: Acked-by: Richard Weinberger rich...@nod.at I'd be happy to take the arm64 part, but it doesn't feel right for mm/* changes (or changes to other archs) to go via our tree. I'm not sure what the best approach is if you want to send this via a single tree. Maybe you could ask akpm nicely? Going though Andrew's tree sounds sane to me. Splitting this will be annoying: I'd probably have to add a flag asking for the new behavior, update all the arches, then remove the flag. The chance of screwing up bisectability in the process seems pretty high. This seems like overkill for a patch that mostly deletes code. Akpm, can you take this? --Andy Thanks, //richard -- Andy Lutomirski AMA Capital Management, LLC From 3a4ddfaab96d1dd06b9cd6298e74a91c5a956ece Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 Message-Id: 3a4ddfaab96d1dd06b9cd6298e74a91c5a956ece.1406227593.git.l...@amacapital.net From: Andy Lutomirski l...@amacapital.net Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2014 10:28:20 -0700 Subject: [PATCH] arm64,ia64,ppc,s390,sh,tile,um,x86,mm: Remove default gate area The core mm code will provide a default gate area based on FIXADDR_USER_START and FIXADDR_USER_END if !defined(__HAVE_ARCH_GATE_AREA) defined(AT_SYSINFO_EHDR). This default is only useful for ia64. arm64, ppc, s390, sh, tile, 64-bit UML, and x86_32 have their own code just to disable it. arm, 32-bit UML, and x86_64 have gate areas, but they have their own implementations. This gets rid of the default and moves the code into ia64. This should save some code on architectures without a gate area: it's now possible to inline the gate_area functions in the default case. Cc: Catalin Marinas catalin.mari...@arm.com Cc: Will Deacon will.dea...@arm.com Cc: Tony Luck tony.l...@intel.com Cc: Fenghua Yu fenghua...@intel.com Cc: Benjamin Herrenschmidt b...@kernel.crashing.org Cc: Paul Mackerras pau...@samba.org Cc: Martin Schwidefsky schwidef...@de.ibm.com Cc: Heiko Carstens heiko.carst...@de.ibm.com Cc: linux...@de.ibm.com Cc: Chris Metcalf cmetc...@tilera.com Cc: Jeff Dike jd...@addtoit.com Cc: Richard Weinberger rich...@nod.at Cc: Thomas Gleixner t...@linutronix.de Cc: Ingo Molnar mi...@redhat.com Cc: H. Peter Anvin h...@zytor.com Cc: Nathan Lynch nathan_ly...@mentor.com Cc: x...@kernel.org Cc: linux-a...@vger.kernel.org Cc: linux-arm-ker...@lists.infradead.org Cc: linux-ker...@vger.kernel.org Cc: linux-i...@vger.kernel.org Cc: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org Cc: linux-s...@vger.kernel.org Cc: linux...@vger.kernel.org Cc: user-mode-linux-de...@lists.sourceforge.net Cc: linux...@kvack.org Acked-by: Nathan Lynch nathan_ly...@mentor.com Acked-by: H. Peter Anvin h...@linux.intel.com Acked-by: Benjamin Herrenschmidt b...@kernel.crashing.org [in principle] Acked-by: Richard Weinberger rich...@nod.at [for um] Acked-by: Will Deacon will.dea...@arm.com [for arm64] Signed-off-by: Andy Lutomirski l...@amacapital.net --- arch/arm64/include/asm/page.h | 3 --- arch/arm64/kernel/vdso.c | 19 --- arch/ia64/include/asm/page.h | 2 ++ arch/ia64/mm/init.c| 26 ++ arch/powerpc/include/asm/page.h| 3 --- arch/powerpc/kernel/vdso.c | 16 arch/s390/include/asm/page.h | 2 -- arch/s390/kernel/vdso.c| 15 --- arch/sh/include/asm/page.h | 5 -
Re: [PATCH v3] arm64, ia64, ppc, s390, sh, tile, um, x86, mm: Remove default gate area
On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 03:47:26PM +0100, Andy Lutomirski wrote: On Sun, Jul 13, 2014 at 1:01 PM, Andy Lutomirski l...@amacapital.net wrote: The core mm code will provide a default gate area based on FIXADDR_USER_START and FIXADDR_USER_END if !defined(__HAVE_ARCH_GATE_AREA) defined(AT_SYSINFO_EHDR). This default is only useful for ia64. arm64, ppc, s390, sh, tile, 64-bit UML, and x86_32 have their own code just to disable it. arm, 32-bit UML, and x86_64 have gate areas, but they have their own implementations. This gets rid of the default and moves the code into ia64. This should save some code on architectures without a gate area: it's now possible to inline the gate_area functions in the default case. Can one of you pull this somewhere? Otherwise I can put it somewhere stable and ask for -next inclusion, but that seems like overkill for a single patch. I'd be happy to take the arm64 part, but it doesn't feel right for mm/* changes (or changes to other archs) to go via our tree. I'm not sure what the best approach is if you want to send this via a single tree. Maybe you could ask akpm nicely? Will ___ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
Re: [PATCH v3] arm64, ia64, ppc, s390, sh, tile, um, x86, mm: Remove default gate area
Am 18.07.2014 12:14, schrieb Will Deacon: On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 03:47:26PM +0100, Andy Lutomirski wrote: On Sun, Jul 13, 2014 at 1:01 PM, Andy Lutomirski l...@amacapital.net wrote: The core mm code will provide a default gate area based on FIXADDR_USER_START and FIXADDR_USER_END if !defined(__HAVE_ARCH_GATE_AREA) defined(AT_SYSINFO_EHDR). This default is only useful for ia64. arm64, ppc, s390, sh, tile, 64-bit UML, and x86_32 have their own code just to disable it. arm, 32-bit UML, and x86_64 have gate areas, but they have their own implementations. This gets rid of the default and moves the code into ia64. This should save some code on architectures without a gate area: it's now possible to inline the gate_area functions in the default case. Can one of you pull this somewhere? Otherwise I can put it somewhere stable and ask for -next inclusion, but that seems like overkill for a single patch. For the um bits: Acked-by: Richard Weinberger rich...@nod.at I'd be happy to take the arm64 part, but it doesn't feel right for mm/* changes (or changes to other archs) to go via our tree. I'm not sure what the best approach is if you want to send this via a single tree. Maybe you could ask akpm nicely? Going though Andrew's tree sounds sane to me. Thanks, //richard ___ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
Re: [PATCH v3] arm64, ia64, ppc, s390, sh, tile, um, x86, mm: Remove default gate area
On 07/18/2014 09:53 AM, Andy Lutomirski wrote: Splitting this will be annoying: I'd probably have to add a flag asking for the new behavior, update all the arches, then remove the flag. The chance of screwing up bisectability in the process seems pretty high. This seems like overkill for a patch that mostly deletes code. Akpm, can you take this? I'm fine with it as-is. Acked-by: H. Peter Anvin h...@linux.intel.com ___ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
Re: [PATCH v3] arm64, ia64, ppc, s390, sh, tile, um, x86, mm: Remove default gate area
On Jul 18, 2014 3:20 AM, Richard Weinberger rich...@nod.at wrote: Am 18.07.2014 12:14, schrieb Will Deacon: On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 03:47:26PM +0100, Andy Lutomirski wrote: On Sun, Jul 13, 2014 at 1:01 PM, Andy Lutomirski l...@amacapital.net wrote: The core mm code will provide a default gate area based on FIXADDR_USER_START and FIXADDR_USER_END if !defined(__HAVE_ARCH_GATE_AREA) defined(AT_SYSINFO_EHDR). This default is only useful for ia64. arm64, ppc, s390, sh, tile, 64-bit UML, and x86_32 have their own code just to disable it. arm, 32-bit UML, and x86_64 have gate areas, but they have their own implementations. This gets rid of the default and moves the code into ia64. This should save some code on architectures without a gate area: it's now possible to inline the gate_area functions in the default case. Can one of you pull this somewhere? Otherwise I can put it somewhere stable and ask for -next inclusion, but that seems like overkill for a single patch. For the um bits: Acked-by: Richard Weinberger rich...@nod.at I'd be happy to take the arm64 part, but it doesn't feel right for mm/* changes (or changes to other archs) to go via our tree. I'm not sure what the best approach is if you want to send this via a single tree. Maybe you could ask akpm nicely? Going though Andrew's tree sounds sane to me. Splitting this will be annoying: I'd probably have to add a flag asking for the new behavior, update all the arches, then remove the flag. The chance of screwing up bisectability in the process seems pretty high. This seems like overkill for a patch that mostly deletes code. Akpm, can you take this? --Andy Thanks, //richard ___ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
Re: [PATCH v3] arm64, ia64, ppc, s390, sh, tile, um, x86, mm: Remove default gate area
On 07/18/2014 11:53 AM, Andy Lutomirski wrote: On Jul 18, 2014 3:20 AM, Richard Weinberger rich...@nod.at mailto:rich...@nod.at wrote: Am 18.07.2014 12:14, schrieb Will Deacon: On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 03:47:26PM +0100, Andy Lutomirski wrote: On Sun, Jul 13, 2014 at 1:01 PM, Andy Lutomirski l...@amacapital.net mailto:l...@amacapital.net wrote: The core mm code will provide a default gate area based on FIXADDR_USER_START and FIXADDR_USER_END if !defined(__HAVE_ARCH_GATE_AREA) defined(AT_SYSINFO_EHDR). This default is only useful for ia64. arm64, ppc, s390, sh, tile, 64-bit UML, and x86_32 have their own code just to disable it. arm, 32-bit UML, and x86_64 have gate areas, but they have their own implementations. This gets rid of the default and moves the code into ia64. This should save some code on architectures without a gate area: it's now possible to inline the gate_area functions in the default case. Can one of you pull this somewhere? Otherwise I can put it somewhere stable and ask for -next inclusion, but that seems like overkill for a single patch. For the um bits: Acked-by: Richard Weinberger rich...@nod.at mailto:rich...@nod.at I'd be happy to take the arm64 part, but it doesn't feel right for mm/* changes (or changes to other archs) to go via our tree. I'm not sure what the best approach is if you want to send this via a single tree. Maybe you could ask akpm nicely? Going though Andrew's tree sounds sane to me. Splitting this will be annoying: I'd probably have to add a flag asking for the new behavior, update all the arches, then remove the flag. The chance of screwing up bisectability in the process seems pretty high. This seems like overkill for a patch that mostly deletes code. Akpm, can you take this? FWIW: Acked-by: Nathan Lynch nathan_ly...@mentor.com This patch allows me to avoid adding a bunch of empty hooks to arch/arm when adding VDSO support: http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2014-June/268045.html ___ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
Re: [PATCH v3] arm64, ia64, ppc, s390, sh, tile, um, x86, mm: Remove default gate area
On Sun, Jul 13, 2014 at 1:01 PM, Andy Lutomirski l...@amacapital.net wrote: The core mm code will provide a default gate area based on FIXADDR_USER_START and FIXADDR_USER_END if !defined(__HAVE_ARCH_GATE_AREA) defined(AT_SYSINFO_EHDR). This default is only useful for ia64. arm64, ppc, s390, sh, tile, 64-bit UML, and x86_32 have their own code just to disable it. arm, 32-bit UML, and x86_64 have gate areas, but they have their own implementations. This gets rid of the default and moves the code into ia64. This should save some code on architectures without a gate area: it's now possible to inline the gate_area functions in the default case. Can one of you pull this somewhere? Otherwise I can put it somewhere stable and ask for -next inclusion, but that seems like overkill for a single patch. --Andy ___ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
