Re: [PATCH v3 4/8] s390/airq: use DMA memory for adapter interrupts
On Tue, 4 Jun 2019 16:51:20 +0200 Cornelia Huck wrote: > On Tue, 4 Jun 2019 15:22:56 +0200 > Halil Pasic wrote: > > > On Mon, 3 Jun 2019 17:27:40 +0200 > > Cornelia Huck wrote: > > > > Apologies if that already has been answered (and I missed it in my mail > > > pile...), but two things had come to my mind previously: > > > > > > - CHSC... does anything need to be done there? Last time I asked: > > > "Anyway, css_bus_init() uses some chscs > > >early (before cio_dma_pool_init), so we could not use the pools > > >there, even if we wanted to. Do chsc commands either work, or else > > >fail benignly on a protected virt guest?" > > > > Protected virt won't support all CHSC. The supported ones won't requre > > use of shared memory. So we are fine. > > I suppose the supported ones are the sync chscs that use the chsc area > as a direct parameter (and therefore are handled similarly to the other > I/O instructions that supply a direct parameter)? I don't think we care > about async chscs in KVM/QEMU anyway, as we don't even emulate chsc > subchannels :) (And IIRC, you don't get chsc subchannels in z/VM > guests, either.) Nod. > > > > > > - PCI indicators... does this interact with any dma configuration on > > > the pci device? (I know pci is not supported yet, and I don't really > > > expect any problems.) > > > > > > > It does but, I'm pretty confident we don't have a problem with PCI. IMHO > > Sebastian is the guy who needs to be paranoid about this, and he r-b-ed > > the respective patches. > > Just wanted to make sure that this was on the radar. You guys are > obviously in a better position than me to judge this :) > > Anyway, I do not intend to annoy with those questions, it's just hard > to get a feel if there are areas that still need care if you don't have > access to the documentation for this... if you tell me that you are > aware of it and it should work, that's fine for me. > The questions are important. It is just the not so unusual problem with the availability of public documentation that makes things a bit difficult for me as well. And sorry if these questions were ignored in the past. I did not have the bandwidth to take care of all the questions properly, but I did enough so that the other guys never knew if they need to engage or not. Regards, Halil ___ Virtualization mailing list Virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
Re: [PATCH v3 4/8] s390/airq: use DMA memory for adapter interrupts
On Tue, 4 Jun 2019 15:22:56 +0200 Halil Pasic wrote: > On Mon, 3 Jun 2019 17:27:40 +0200 > Cornelia Huck wrote: > > Apologies if that already has been answered (and I missed it in my mail > > pile...), but two things had come to my mind previously: > > > > - CHSC... does anything need to be done there? Last time I asked: > > "Anyway, css_bus_init() uses some chscs > >early (before cio_dma_pool_init), so we could not use the pools > >there, even if we wanted to. Do chsc commands either work, or else > >fail benignly on a protected virt guest?" > > Protected virt won't support all CHSC. The supported ones won't requre > use of shared memory. So we are fine. I suppose the supported ones are the sync chscs that use the chsc area as a direct parameter (and therefore are handled similarly to the other I/O instructions that supply a direct parameter)? I don't think we care about async chscs in KVM/QEMU anyway, as we don't even emulate chsc subchannels :) (And IIRC, you don't get chsc subchannels in z/VM guests, either.) > > > - PCI indicators... does this interact with any dma configuration on > > the pci device? (I know pci is not supported yet, and I don't really > > expect any problems.) > > > > It does but, I'm pretty confident we don't have a problem with PCI. IMHO > Sebastian is the guy who needs to be paranoid about this, and he r-b-ed > the respective patches. Just wanted to make sure that this was on the radar. You guys are obviously in a better position than me to judge this :) Anyway, I do not intend to annoy with those questions, it's just hard to get a feel if there are areas that still need care if you don't have access to the documentation for this... if you tell me that you are aware of it and it should work, that's fine for me. ___ Virtualization mailing list Virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
Re: [PATCH v3 7/8] virtio/s390: use DMA memory for ccw I/O and classic notifiers
On Tue, 4 Jun 2019 15:36:25 +0200 Cornelia Huck wrote: > On Tue, 4 Jun 2019 15:08:19 +0200 > Halil Pasic wrote: > [..] > > Two things: > - The call path goes from the vcdev to the vdev, then back to the vcdev > and then to the cdev. Going from the vcdev to the cdev directly > eliminates the roundtrip via the vdev, which I think does not add > anything. > - I prefer > variable = function_returning_a_pointer(...); > over > function_setting_a_variable(..., variable); > The latter obscures the fact that we change the value of the > variable, unless named very obviously. > I understand. Here it's especially bad because what looks like a function is actually a macro so it ain't even fn(..., ) but just fn(..., variable). I guess I'm a bit desensitized towards the latter because of my c++ background. > > > > I will change this for v4 as you requested. Again sorry for missing it! > > np, can happen. Thanks for the explanation. I will use ccw_device_dma_zalloc() directly in v4. Regards, Halil ___ Virtualization mailing list Virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
[PATCH v2 19/22] docs: fix broken documentation links
Mostly due to x86 and acpi conversion, several documentation links are still pointing to the old file. Fix them. Signed-off-by: Mauro Carvalho Chehab Reviewed-by: Wolfram Sang Reviewed-by: Sven Van Asbroeck Reviewed-by: Bhupesh Sharma Acked-by: Mark Brown --- Documentation/acpi/dsd/leds.txt | 2 +- Documentation/admin-guide/kernel-parameters.rst | 6 +++--- Documentation/admin-guide/kernel-parameters.txt | 16 Documentation/admin-guide/ras.rst| 2 +- .../devicetree/bindings/net/fsl-enetc.txt| 7 +++ .../bindings/pci/amlogic,meson-pcie.txt | 2 +- .../bindings/regulator/qcom,rpmh-regulator.txt | 2 +- Documentation/devicetree/booting-without-of.txt | 2 +- Documentation/driver-api/gpio/board.rst | 2 +- Documentation/driver-api/gpio/consumer.rst | 2 +- .../firmware-guide/acpi/enumeration.rst | 2 +- .../firmware-guide/acpi/method-tracing.rst | 2 +- Documentation/i2c/instantiating-devices | 2 +- Documentation/sysctl/kernel.txt | 4 ++-- .../translations/zh_CN/process/4.Coding.rst | 2 +- Documentation/x86/x86_64/5level-paging.rst | 2 +- Documentation/x86/x86_64/boot-options.rst| 4 ++-- .../x86/x86_64/fake-numa-for-cpusets.rst | 2 +- MAINTAINERS | 4 ++-- arch/arm/Kconfig | 2 +- arch/arm64/kernel/kexec_image.c | 2 +- arch/x86/Kconfig | 14 +++--- arch/x86/Kconfig.debug | 2 +- arch/x86/boot/header.S | 2 +- arch/x86/entry/entry_64.S| 2 +- arch/x86/include/asm/bootparam_utils.h | 2 +- arch/x86/include/asm/page_64_types.h | 2 +- arch/x86/include/asm/pgtable_64_types.h | 2 +- arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/amd.c | 2 +- arch/x86/kernel/kexec-bzimage64.c| 2 +- arch/x86/kernel/pci-dma.c| 2 +- arch/x86/mm/tlb.c| 2 +- arch/x86/platform/pvh/enlighten.c| 2 +- drivers/acpi/Kconfig | 10 +- drivers/net/ethernet/faraday/ftgmac100.c | 2 +- .../fieldbus/Documentation/fieldbus_dev.txt | 4 ++-- drivers/vhost/vhost.c| 2 +- include/acpi/acpi_drivers.h | 2 +- include/linux/fs_context.h | 2 +- include/linux/lsm_hooks.h| 2 +- mm/Kconfig | 2 +- security/Kconfig | 2 +- tools/include/linux/err.h| 2 +- tools/objtool/Documentation/stack-validation.txt | 4 ++-- 44 files changed, 70 insertions(+), 71 deletions(-) diff --git a/Documentation/acpi/dsd/leds.txt b/Documentation/acpi/dsd/leds.txt index 81a63af42ed2..cc58b1a574c5 100644 --- a/Documentation/acpi/dsd/leds.txt +++ b/Documentation/acpi/dsd/leds.txt @@ -96,4 +96,4 @@ where http://www.uefi.org/sites/default/files/resources/_DSD-hierarchical-data-extension-UUID-v1.1.pdf>, referenced 2019-02-21. -[7] Documentation/acpi/dsd/data-node-reference.txt +[7] Documentation/firmware-guide/acpi/dsd/data-node-references.rst diff --git a/Documentation/admin-guide/kernel-parameters.rst b/Documentation/admin-guide/kernel-parameters.rst index 0124980dca2d..8d3273e32eb1 100644 --- a/Documentation/admin-guide/kernel-parameters.rst +++ b/Documentation/admin-guide/kernel-parameters.rst @@ -167,7 +167,7 @@ parameter is applicable:: X86-32 X86-32, aka i386 architecture is enabled. X86-64 X86-64 architecture is enabled. More X86-64 boot options can be found in - Documentation/x86/x86_64/boot-options.txt . + Documentation/x86/x86_64/boot-options.rst. X86 Either 32-bit or 64-bit x86 (same as X86-32+X86-64) X86_UV SGI UV support is enabled. XEN Xen support is enabled @@ -181,10 +181,10 @@ In addition, the following text indicates that the option:: Parameters denoted with BOOT are actually interpreted by the boot loader, and have no meaning to the kernel directly. Do not modify the syntax of boot loader parameters without extreme -need or coordination with . +need or coordination with . There are also arch-specific kernel-parameters not documented here. -See for example . +See for example . Note that ALL kernel parameters listed below are CASE SENSITIVE, and that a trailing = on the name of any parameter states that that parameter will diff --git a/Documentation/admin-guide/kernel-parameters.txt b/Documentation/admin-guide/kernel-parameters.txt index c0e84d7a5888..ab29adb55d18 100644 --- a/Documentation/admin-guide/kernel-parameters.txt +++
Re: [PATCH v3 7/8] virtio/s390: use DMA memory for ccw I/O and classic notifiers
On Tue, 4 Jun 2019 15:08:19 +0200
Halil Pasic wrote:
> On Mon, 3 Jun 2019 18:17:16 +0200
> Cornelia Huck wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 29 May 2019 14:26:56 +0200
> > Michael Mueller wrote:
> > (...)
> >
> > > @@ -176,6 +180,22 @@ static struct virtio_ccw_device *to_vc_device(struct
> > > virtio_device *vdev)
> > > return container_of(vdev, struct virtio_ccw_device, vdev);
> > > }
> > >
> > > +static inline void *__vc_dma_alloc(struct virtio_device *vdev, size_t
> > > size)
> > > +{
> > > + return ccw_device_dma_zalloc(to_vc_device(vdev)->cdev, size);
> > > +}
> > > +
> > > +static inline void __vc_dma_free(struct virtio_device *vdev, size_t size,
> > > + void *cpu_addr)
> > > +{
> > > + return ccw_device_dma_free(to_vc_device(vdev)->cdev, cpu_addr, size);
> > > +}
> > > +
> > > +#define vc_dma_alloc_struct(vdev, ptr) \
> > > + ({ptr = __vc_dma_alloc(vdev, sizeof(*(ptr))); })
> > > +#define vc_dma_free_struct(vdev, ptr) \
> > > + __vc_dma_free(vdev, sizeof(*(ptr)), (ptr))
> > > +
> >
> > I *still* don't like these #defines (and the __vc_dma_* functions), as I
> > already commented last time. I think they make it harder to follow the
> > code.
> >
>
> Sorry! I think we simply forgot to address this comment of yours.
>
> > > static void drop_airq_indicator(struct virtqueue *vq, struct airq_info
> > > *info)
> > > {
> > > unsigned long i, flags;
> > > @@ -336,8 +356,7 @@ static void virtio_ccw_drop_indicator(struct
> > > virtio_ccw_device *vcdev,
> > > struct airq_info *airq_info = vcdev->airq_info;
> > >
> > > if (vcdev->is_thinint) {
> > > - thinint_area = kzalloc(sizeof(*thinint_area),
> > > -GFP_DMA | GFP_KERNEL);
> > > + vc_dma_alloc_struct(>vdev, thinint_area);
> >
> > Last time I wrote:
> >
> > "Any reason why this takes a detour via the virtio device? The ccw
> > device is already referenced in vcdev, isn't it?
> >
> > thinint_area = ccw_device_dma_zalloc(vcdev->cdev, sizeof(*thinint_area));
> >
> > looks much more obvious to me."
> >
> > It still seems more obvious to me.
> >
>
>
> The reason why I decided to introduce __vc_dma_alloc() back then is
> because I had no clarity what do we want to do there. If you take a look
> the body of __vc_dma_alloc() changed quite a lot, while I the usage not
> so much.
>
> Regarding why is the first argument a pointer struct virtio_device, the
> idea was probably to keep the needs to be ZONE_DMA and can use the full
> 64 bit address space separate. But I abandoned the ideal.
>
> Also vc_dma_alloc_struct() started out more elaborate (I used to manage
> a dma_addr_t as well -- see RFC).
Understood, history is often important :)
>
> I'm not quite sure what is your problem with the these. As far as I
> understand, this is another of those matter of taste things. But it ain't
> a big deal.
Two things:
- The call path goes from the vcdev to the vdev, then back to the vcdev
and then to the cdev. Going from the vcdev to the cdev directly
eliminates the roundtrip via the vdev, which I think does not add
anything.
- I prefer
variable = function_returning_a_pointer(...);
over
function_setting_a_variable(..., variable);
The latter obscures the fact that we change the value of the
variable, unless named very obviously.
>
> I will change this for v4 as you requested. Again sorry for missing it!
np, can happen.
>
> Regards,
> Halil
>
>
> > > if (!thinint_area)
> > > return;
> > > thinint_area->summary_indicator =
> >
>
___
Virtualization mailing list
Virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
Re: [PATCH v3 4/8] s390/airq: use DMA memory for adapter interrupts
On Mon, 3 Jun 2019 17:27:40 +0200 Cornelia Huck wrote: > On Wed, 29 May 2019 14:26:53 +0200 > Michael Mueller wrote: > > > From: Halil Pasic > > > > Protected virtualization guests have to use shared pages for airq > > notifier bit vectors, because hypervisor needs to write these bits. > > > > Let us make sure we allocate DMA memory for the notifier bit vectors by > > replacing the kmem_cache with a dma_cache and kalloc() with > > cio_dma_zalloc(). > > > > Signed-off-by: Halil Pasic > > Reviewed-by: Sebastian Ott > > Signed-off-by: Michael Mueller > > --- > > arch/s390/include/asm/airq.h | 2 ++ > > drivers/s390/cio/airq.c | 32 > > drivers/s390/cio/cio.h | 2 ++ > > drivers/s390/cio/css.c | 1 + > > 4 files changed, 25 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-) > > Apologies if that already has been answered (and I missed it in my mail > pile...), but two things had come to my mind previously: > > - CHSC... does anything need to be done there? Last time I asked: > "Anyway, css_bus_init() uses some chscs >early (before cio_dma_pool_init), so we could not use the pools >there, even if we wanted to. Do chsc commands either work, or else >fail benignly on a protected virt guest?" Protected virt won't support all CHSC. The supported ones won't requre use of shared memory. So we are fine. > - PCI indicators... does this interact with any dma configuration on > the pci device? (I know pci is not supported yet, and I don't really > expect any problems.) > It does but, I'm pretty confident we don't have a problem with PCI. IMHO Sebastian is the guy who needs to be paranoid about this, and he r-b-ed the respective patches. Regards, Halil ___ Virtualization mailing list Virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
Re: [PATCH v3 7/8] virtio/s390: use DMA memory for ccw I/O and classic notifiers
On Mon, 3 Jun 2019 18:17:16 +0200
Cornelia Huck wrote:
> On Wed, 29 May 2019 14:26:56 +0200
> Michael Mueller wrote:
>
> > From: Halil Pasic
> >
> > Before virtio-ccw could get away with not using DMA API for the pieces of
> > memory it does ccw I/O with. With protected virtualization this has to
> > change, since the hypervisor needs to read and sometimes also write these
> > pieces of memory.
> >
> > The hypervisor is supposed to poke the classic notifiers, if these are
> > used, out of band with regards to ccw I/O. So these need to be allocated
> > as DMA memory (which is shared memory for protected virtualization
> > guests).
> >
> > Let us factor out everything from struct virtio_ccw_device that needs to
> > be DMA memory in a satellite that is allocated as such.
> >
> > Note: The control blocks of I/O instructions do not need to be shared.
> > These are marshalled by the ultravisor.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Halil Pasic
> > Reviewed-by: Pierre Morel
> > Signed-off-by: Michael Mueller
> > ---
> > drivers/s390/virtio/virtio_ccw.c | 177
> > +--
> > 1 file changed, 96 insertions(+), 81 deletions(-)
> >
>
> (...)
>
> > @@ -176,6 +180,22 @@ static struct virtio_ccw_device *to_vc_device(struct
> > virtio_device *vdev)
> > return container_of(vdev, struct virtio_ccw_device, vdev);
> > }
> >
> > +static inline void *__vc_dma_alloc(struct virtio_device *vdev, size_t size)
> > +{
> > + return ccw_device_dma_zalloc(to_vc_device(vdev)->cdev, size);
> > +}
> > +
> > +static inline void __vc_dma_free(struct virtio_device *vdev, size_t size,
> > +void *cpu_addr)
> > +{
> > + return ccw_device_dma_free(to_vc_device(vdev)->cdev, cpu_addr, size);
> > +}
> > +
> > +#define vc_dma_alloc_struct(vdev, ptr) \
> > + ({ptr = __vc_dma_alloc(vdev, sizeof(*(ptr))); })
> > +#define vc_dma_free_struct(vdev, ptr) \
> > + __vc_dma_free(vdev, sizeof(*(ptr)), (ptr))
> > +
>
> I *still* don't like these #defines (and the __vc_dma_* functions), as I
> already commented last time. I think they make it harder to follow the
> code.
>
Sorry! I think we simply forgot to address this comment of yours.
> > static void drop_airq_indicator(struct virtqueue *vq, struct airq_info
> > *info)
> > {
> > unsigned long i, flags;
> > @@ -336,8 +356,7 @@ static void virtio_ccw_drop_indicator(struct
> > virtio_ccw_device *vcdev,
> > struct airq_info *airq_info = vcdev->airq_info;
> >
> > if (vcdev->is_thinint) {
> > - thinint_area = kzalloc(sizeof(*thinint_area),
> > - GFP_DMA | GFP_KERNEL);
> > + vc_dma_alloc_struct(>vdev, thinint_area);
>
> Last time I wrote:
>
> "Any reason why this takes a detour via the virtio device? The ccw
> device is already referenced in vcdev, isn't it?
>
> thinint_area = ccw_device_dma_zalloc(vcdev->cdev, sizeof(*thinint_area));
>
> looks much more obvious to me."
>
> It still seems more obvious to me.
>
The reason why I decided to introduce __vc_dma_alloc() back then is
because I had no clarity what do we want to do there. If you take a look
the body of __vc_dma_alloc() changed quite a lot, while I the usage not
so much.
Regarding why is the first argument a pointer struct virtio_device, the
idea was probably to keep the needs to be ZONE_DMA and can use the full
64 bit address space separate. But I abandoned the ideal.
Also vc_dma_alloc_struct() started out more elaborate (I used to manage
a dma_addr_t as well -- see RFC).
I'm not quite sure what is your problem with the these. As far as I
understand, this is another of those matter of taste things. But it ain't
a big deal.
I will change this for v4 as you requested. Again sorry for missing it!
Regards,
Halil
> > if (!thinint_area)
> > return;
> > thinint_area->summary_indicator =
>
___
Virtualization mailing list
Virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
Re: [PATCH 22/22] docs: fix broken documentation links
Em Mon, 3 Jun 2019 09:34:15 +0200 Christophe Leroy escreveu: > Le 30/05/2019 à 01:23, Mauro Carvalho Chehab a écrit : > > Mostly due to x86 and acpi conversion, several documentation > > links are still pointing to the old file. Fix them. > > > > Signed-off-by: Mauro Carvalho Chehab > > --- > > Documentation/acpi/dsd/leds.txt | 2 +- > > Documentation/admin-guide/kernel-parameters.rst | 6 +++--- > > Documentation/admin-guide/kernel-parameters.txt | 16 > > Documentation/admin-guide/ras.rst| 2 +- > > .../devicetree/bindings/net/fsl-enetc.txt| 7 +++ > > .../bindings/pci/amlogic,meson-pcie.txt | 2 +- > > .../bindings/regulator/qcom,rpmh-regulator.txt | 2 +- > > Documentation/devicetree/booting-without-of.txt | 2 +- > > Documentation/driver-api/gpio/board.rst | 2 +- > > Documentation/driver-api/gpio/consumer.rst | 2 +- > > .../firmware-guide/acpi/enumeration.rst | 2 +- > > .../firmware-guide/acpi/method-tracing.rst | 2 +- > > Documentation/i2c/instantiating-devices | 2 +- > > Documentation/sysctl/kernel.txt | 4 ++-- > > .../translations/it_IT/process/howto.rst | 2 +- > > .../it_IT/process/stable-kernel-rules.rst| 4 ++-- > > .../translations/zh_CN/process/4.Coding.rst | 2 +- > > Documentation/x86/x86_64/5level-paging.rst | 2 +- > > Documentation/x86/x86_64/boot-options.rst| 4 ++-- > > .../x86/x86_64/fake-numa-for-cpusets.rst | 2 +- > > MAINTAINERS | 6 +++--- > > arch/arm/Kconfig | 2 +- > > arch/arm64/kernel/kexec_image.c | 2 +- > > arch/powerpc/Kconfig | 2 +- > > arch/x86/Kconfig | 16 > > arch/x86/Kconfig.debug | 2 +- > > arch/x86/boot/header.S | 2 +- > > arch/x86/entry/entry_64.S| 2 +- > > arch/x86/include/asm/bootparam_utils.h | 2 +- > > arch/x86/include/asm/page_64_types.h | 2 +- > > arch/x86/include/asm/pgtable_64_types.h | 2 +- > > arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/amd.c | 2 +- > > arch/x86/kernel/kexec-bzimage64.c| 2 +- > > arch/x86/kernel/pci-dma.c| 2 +- > > arch/x86/mm/tlb.c| 2 +- > > arch/x86/platform/pvh/enlighten.c| 2 +- > > drivers/acpi/Kconfig | 10 +- > > drivers/net/ethernet/faraday/ftgmac100.c | 2 +- > > .../fieldbus/Documentation/fieldbus_dev.txt | 4 ++-- > > drivers/vhost/vhost.c| 2 +- > > include/acpi/acpi_drivers.h | 2 +- > > include/linux/fs_context.h | 2 +- > > include/linux/lsm_hooks.h| 2 +- > > mm/Kconfig | 2 +- > > security/Kconfig | 2 +- > > tools/include/linux/err.h| 2 +- > > tools/objtool/Documentation/stack-validation.txt | 4 ++-- > > tools/testing/selftests/x86/protection_keys.c| 2 +- > > 48 files changed, 77 insertions(+), 78 deletions(-) > > [...] > > > diff --git a/arch/powerpc/Kconfig b/arch/powerpc/Kconfig > > index 8c1c636308c8..e868d2bd48b8 100644 > > --- a/arch/powerpc/Kconfig > > +++ b/arch/powerpc/Kconfig > > @@ -898,7 +898,7 @@ config PPC_MEM_KEYS > > page-based protections, but without requiring modification of the > > page tables when an application changes protection domains. > > > > - For details, see Documentation/vm/protection-keys.rst > > + For details, see Documentation/x86/protection-keys.rst > > It looks strange to reference an x86 file, for powerpc arch. Indeed. Yet, seeking for the API documented there: $ git grep -l pkey_mprotect Documentation/x86/protection-keys.rst arch/alpha/kernel/syscalls/syscall.tbl arch/arm/tools/syscall.tbl arch/arm64/include/asm/unistd32.h arch/ia64/kernel/syscalls/syscall.tbl arch/m68k/kernel/syscalls/syscall.tbl arch/microblaze/kernel/syscalls/syscall.tbl arch/mips/kernel/syscalls/syscall_n32.tbl arch/mips/kernel/syscalls/syscall_n64.tbl arch/mips/kernel/syscalls/syscall_o32.tbl arch/parisc/kernel/syscalls/syscall.tbl arch/powerpc/kernel/syscalls/syscall.tbl arch/s390/kernel/syscalls/syscall.tbl arch/sh/kernel/syscalls/syscall.tbl arch/sparc/kernel/syscalls/syscall.tbl arch/x86/entry/syscalls/syscall_32.tbl arch/x86/entry/syscalls/syscall_64.tbl arch/xtensa/kernel/syscalls/syscall.tbl include/linux/syscalls.h include/uapi/asm-generic/unistd.h kernel/sys_ni.c mm/mprotect.c tools/include/uapi/asm-generic/unistd.h tools/perf/arch/powerpc/entry/syscalls/syscall.tbl
