Re: [PATCH] staging: android: ion: Bail out upon SIGKILL when allocating memory.

Hello Tetsuo, On Mon, 1 Jul 2019 at 17:07, Laura Abbott wrote: > > On 7/1/19 6:55 AM, Tetsuo Handa wrote: > > Andrew, can you pick up this patch? No response from Laura Abbott nor Sumit > > Semwal. Apologies; it didn't seem to get flitered out for me. I'll re-chec

Re: [PATCH 13/14] staging: android: ion: Do not sync CPU cache on map/unmap

Hello everyone, Sincere apologies for chiming in a bit late here, but was off due to some health issues. Also, adding Daniel Vetter to the mix, since he has been one of the core guys who shaped up dma-buf as it is today. On Tue, 22 Jan 2019 at 02:51, Andrew F. Davis wrote: On 1/21/19 5:22

Re: [PATCH] staging: android: ion: remove duplicate buffer field initializes

er. Remove one set. > > Move the initialization of these two fields together with the > statements that initialize the other two fields from the function > parameters, prior to the heap allocate() call, for consistency. > > Signed-off-by: Todd Poynor <toddpoy...@google.com

Re: [PATCH] staging: android: ion: remove duplicate buffer field initializes

> > Move the initialization of these two fields together with the > statements that initialize the other two fields from the function > parameters, prior to the heap allocate() call, for consistency. > > Signed-off-by: Todd Poynor Acked-by: Sumit Semwal > --- > drivers/staging/

Re: [PATCH 1/2] staging: android: ion: Cleanup ion_page_pool_alloc_pages

can just return > alloc_pages without any judgement. > With patch history comment addressed (same as the other patch you sent), > Signed-off-by: Yisheng Xie <xieyishe...@huawei.com> Please feel free to add my Acked-by: Sumit Semwal <sumit.sem...@linaro.org> > --- > drive

Re: [PATCH 1/2] staging: android: ion: Cleanup ion_page_pool_alloc_pages

without any judgement. > With patch history comment addressed (same as the other patch you sent), > Signed-off-by: Yisheng Xie Please feel free to add my Acked-by: Sumit Semwal > --- > drivers/staging/android/ion/ion_page_pool.c | 8 ++-- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 6

Re: [PATCH 2/2] staging: android: ion: Combine cache and uncache pools

bined. > Thanks for the patch! Perhaps you should also put the version history here, to capture the changes from previous versions? > Signed-off-by: Yisheng Xie <xieyishe...@huawei.com> With that done, please feel free to add Acked-by: Sumit Semwal <sumit.sem...@linaro.org> > ---

Re: [PATCH 2/2] staging: android: ion: Combine cache and uncache pools

Perhaps you should also put the version history here, to capture the changes from previous versions? > Signed-off-by: Yisheng Xie With that done, please feel free to add Acked-by: Sumit Semwal > --- > drivers/staging/android/ion/ion.c | 5 -- > drivers/staging/android/io

Re: [PATCH 1/6] MAINTAINERS: Remove ANDROID ION pattern

gt;> >> Remove the pattern. >> > > Acked-by: Laura Abbott <labb...@redhat.com> > Acked-by: Sumit Semwal <sumit.sem...@linaro.org> > >> Signed-off-by: Joe Perches <j...@perches.com> >> cc: Laura Abbott <labb...@redhat.com> >

Re: [PATCH 1/6] MAINTAINERS: Remove ANDROID ION pattern

the pattern. >> > > Acked-by: Laura Abbott > Acked-by: Sumit Semwal > >> Signed-off-by: Joe Perches >> cc: Laura Abbott >> cc: Sumit Semwal >> --- >> MAINTAINERS | 1 - >> 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/M

Re: [PATCH 4.4 00/53] 4.4.113-stable review

Hi Greg, On 23 January 2018 at 12:09, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > On Tue, Jan 23, 2018 at 01:19:07AM +0530, Naresh Kamboju wrote: >> On 22 January 2018 at 14:09, Greg Kroah-Hartman >> wrote: >> > This is the start of the stable review

Re: [PATCH 4.4 00/53] 4.4.113-stable review

Hi Greg, On 23 January 2018 at 12:09, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > On Tue, Jan 23, 2018 at 01:19:07AM +0530, Naresh Kamboju wrote: >> On 22 January 2018 at 14:09, Greg Kroah-Hartman >> wrote: >> > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 4.4.113 release. >> > There are 53 patches in

Re: [PATCH 4.14 00/95] 4.14.4-stable review

On 6 December 2017 at 21:03, Greg Kroah-Hartman <gre...@linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > On Wed, Dec 06, 2017 at 08:11:26PM +0530, Sumit Semwal wrote: >> Hi Greg, >> >> On 5 December 2017 at 11:54, Greg Kroah-Hartman >> <gre...@linuxfoundation.org> wrote: >&g

Re: [PATCH 4.14 00/95] 4.14.4-stable review

On 6 December 2017 at 21:03, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > On Wed, Dec 06, 2017 at 08:11:26PM +0530, Sumit Semwal wrote: >> Hi Greg, >> >> On 5 December 2017 at 11:54, Greg Kroah-Hartman >> wrote: >> > On Mon, Dec 04, 2017 at 03:12:45PM -0600, Tom Gall wrote

Re: [PATCH 4.14 00/95] 4.14.4-stable review

Hi Greg, On 5 December 2017 at 11:54, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > On Mon, Dec 04, 2017 at 03:12:45PM -0600, Tom Gall wrote: >> >> >> > On Dec 4, 2017, at 9:59 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman >> > wrote: >> > >> > This is the start of the stable

Re: [PATCH 4.14 00/95] 4.14.4-stable review

Hi Greg, On 5 December 2017 at 11:54, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > On Mon, Dec 04, 2017 at 03:12:45PM -0600, Tom Gall wrote: >> >> >> > On Dec 4, 2017, at 9:59 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman >> > wrote: >> > >> > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 4.14.4 release. >> > There are 95

Re: [PATCH] dma-buf: Fix ifnullfree.cocci warnings

if (dma_buf_debugfs_dir) > - debugfs_remove_recursive(dma_buf_debugfs_dir); > + debugfs_remove_recursive(dma_buf_debugfs_dir); > } > #else > static inline int dma_buf_init_debugfs(void) > -- > 1.9.1 > -- Thanks and regards, Sumit Semwal Linaro Mobile Group - Kernel Team Lead Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs

Re: [PATCH] dma-buf: Fix ifnullfree.cocci warnings

ive(dma_buf_debugfs_dir); > + debugfs_remove_recursive(dma_buf_debugfs_dir); > } > #else > static inline int dma_buf_init_debugfs(void) > -- > 1.9.1 > -- Thanks and regards, Sumit Semwal Linaro Mobile Group - Kernel Team Lead Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs

Re: [PATCH 0/2] selftests: firmware: skip testing unsupported features

egards, > Amit Pundir > > > Amit Pundir (2): > selftests: firmware: skip unsupported async loading tests > selftests: firmware: skip unsupported custom firmware fallback tests Please feel free to add my Reviewed-by: Sumit Semwal <sumit.sem...@linaro.org> to both these pa

Re: [PATCH 0/2] selftests: firmware: skip testing unsupported features

t; > Amit Pundir (2): > selftests: firmware: skip unsupported async loading tests > selftests: firmware: skip unsupported custom firmware fallback tests Please feel free to add my Reviewed-by: Sumit Semwal to both these patches. > > tools/testing/selftests/firmware/fw_fallback.sh

Re: [PATCH] selftests: breakpoints: fix compile error on breakpoint_test_arm64

Hi Shuah, On 2 November 2017 at 02:22, Shuah Khan <sh...@kernel.org> wrote: > On 10/23/2017 01:42 AM, Sumit Semwal wrote: >> The current mainline breakpoints test for arm64 fails to compile with >> >> breakpoint_test_arm64.c: In function ‘set_watchpoint’: >> bre

Re: [PATCH] selftests: breakpoints: fix compile error on breakpoint_test_arm64

Hi Shuah, On 2 November 2017 at 02:22, Shuah Khan wrote: > On 10/23/2017 01:42 AM, Sumit Semwal wrote: >> The current mainline breakpoints test for arm64 fails to compile with >> >> breakpoint_test_arm64.c: In function ‘set_watchpoint’: >> breakpoint_test_arm64.c

Re: [PATCH] selftests: remove obsolete kconfig fragment for cpu-hotplug

Hello Lei, On 2 November 2017 at 07:43, lyang0 wrote: > > > On 2017年11月02日 06:59, Shuah Khan wrote: >> >> On 11/01/2017 04:52 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote: >>> >>> On Wed, 1 Nov 2017, Shuah Khan wrote: On 10/17/2017 08:10 PM, lei.y...@windriver.com wrote: >

Re: [PATCH] selftests: remove obsolete kconfig fragment for cpu-hotplug

Hello Lei, On 2 November 2017 at 07:43, lyang0 wrote: > > > On 2017年11月02日 06:59, Shuah Khan wrote: >> >> On 11/01/2017 04:52 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote: >>> >>> On Wed, 1 Nov 2017, Shuah Khan wrote: On 10/17/2017 08:10 PM, lei.y...@windriver.com wrote: > > From: Lei Yang >

[PATCH] selftests: breakpoints: fix compile error on breakpoint_test_arm64

it to build, and passes the test on mainline on hikey. Signed-off-by: Sumit Semwal <sumit.sem...@linaro.org> --- tools/testing/selftests/breakpoints/breakpoint_test_arm64.c | 1 + 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/breakpoints/breakpoint_test_arm64.c b/tools/t

[PATCH] selftests: breakpoints: fix compile error on breakpoint_test_arm64

it to build, and passes the test on mainline on hikey. Signed-off-by: Sumit Semwal --- tools/testing/selftests/breakpoints/breakpoint_test_arm64.c | 1 + 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/breakpoints/breakpoint_test_arm64.c b/tools/testing/selftests/breakpoints

Re: tracing, dma-buf: Remove unused trace event dma_fence_annotate_wait_on

rights to drm-misc I assume you'll push this too. >> > > Will it cause conflict if I pull it through my tree? It's just removing > unused traecpoints. I added it to my tree already (but haven't pushed > it to linux-next yet), with th

Re: tracing, dma-buf: Remove unused trace event dma_fence_annotate_wait_on

removing > unused traecpoints. I added it to my tree already (but haven't pushed > it to linux-next yet), with the Reviewed by from Christian. Is that OK? > It shouldn't cause any merge conflicts that Linus can't handle. I suspect it should be ok; please do feel free to add my Acked-by:

Re: [PATCH] Documentation: Add a file explaining the Linux kernel license

...@osg.samsung.com> > Acked-by: Simon Horman <ho...@verge.net.au> > Acked-by: Srinivas Kandagatla <srinivas.kandaga...@linaro.org> > Acked-by: Steven Rostedt (VMware) <rost...@goodmis.org> > Acked-by: Sven Eckelmann <s...@narfation.org> > Acked-by: Takashi Iwai

Re: [PATCH] Documentation: Add a file explaining the Linux kernel license

ed-by: Srinivas Kandagatla > Acked-by: Steven Rostedt (VMware) > Acked-by: Sven Eckelmann > Acked-by: Takashi Iwai (SUSE) > Acked-by: Tejun Heo > Acked-by: Thierry Reding > Acked-by: Tony Luck > Acked-by: Ulf Hansson > Acked-by: Vinod Koul > Acked-by:

Re: [PATCH 4.4 00/47] 4.4.92-stable review

Hi Greg, On 11 October 2017 at 09:16, Tom Gall wrote: > >> On Oct 10, 2017, at 2:50 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman >> wrote: >> >> This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 4.4.92 release. >> There are 47 patches in this series, all will be

Re: [PATCH 4.4 00/47] 4.4.92-stable review

Hi Greg, On 11 October 2017 at 09:16, Tom Gall wrote: > >> On Oct 10, 2017, at 2:50 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman >> wrote: >> >> This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 4.4.92 release. >> There are 47 patches in this series, all will be posted as a response >> to this one. If anyone

Re: [PATCH 4.4 00/41] 4.4.90-stable review

Hi Greg, On 4 October 2017 at 00:55, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > On Tue, Oct 03, 2017 at 03:30:14PM -0500, Tom Gall wrote: >> >> > On Oct 3, 2017, at 7:21 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman >> > wrote: >> > >> > This is the start of the stable review

Re: [PATCH 4.4 00/41] 4.4.90-stable review

Hi Greg, On 4 October 2017 at 00:55, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > On Tue, Oct 03, 2017 at 03:30:14PM -0500, Tom Gall wrote: >> >> > On Oct 3, 2017, at 7:21 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman >> > wrote: >> > >> > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 4.4.90 release. >> > There are 41 patches

Re: [PATCH 4.9 00/18] 4.9.48-stable review

| 2 +- > fs/cifs/smb2pdu.h | 4 ++-- > fs/eventpoll.c| 42 > ++- > include/asm-generic/topology.h| 6 - > kernel/cpuset.c | 1 + > kernel/events/uprobes.c | 2 -- > kernel/fork.c | 8 +++ > lib/mpi/mpicoder.c| 4 +++- > mm/madvise.c | 7 ++ > net/xfrm/xfrm_policy.c| 6 + > 21 files changed, 109 insertions(+), 52 deletions(-) > > -- Thanks and regards, Sumit Semwal Linaro Mobile Group - Kernel Team Lead Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs

Re: [PATCH 4.9 00/18] 4.9.48-stable review

obes.c | 2 -- > kernel/fork.c | 8 +++ > lib/mpi/mpicoder.c| 4 +++- > mm/madvise.c | 7 ++ > net/xfrm/xfrm_policy.c| 6 + > 21 files changed, 109 insertions(+), 52 deletions(-) > > -- Thanks and regards, Sumit Semwal Linaro Mobile Group - Kernel Team Lead Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs

Re: [PATCH 4.9 00/12] 4.9.47-stable review

Hi Greg, On 31 August 2017 at 21:14, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 4.9.47 release. > There are 12 patches in this series, all will be posted as a response > to this one. If anyone has any issues with these being

Re: [PATCH 4.9 00/12] 4.9.47-stable review

Hi Greg, On 31 August 2017 at 21:14, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 4.9.47 release. > There are 12 patches in this series, all will be posted as a response > to this one. If anyone has any issues with these being applied, please > let me know. >

Re: [PATCH 4.9 00/84] 4.9.46-stable review

Hi Greg, On 28 August 2017 at 13:34, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 4.9.46 release. > There are 84 patches in this series, all will be posted as a response > to this one. If anyone has any issues with these being

Re: [PATCH 4.9 00/84] 4.9.46-stable review

Hi Greg, On 28 August 2017 at 13:34, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 4.9.46 release. > There are 84 patches in this series, all will be posted as a response > to this one. If anyone has any issues with these being applied, please > let me know. >

Re: [PATCH 4.9 00/27] 4.9.45-stable review

Hi Greg, On 23 August 2017 at 00:43, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 4.9.45 release. > There are 27 patches in this series, all will be posted as a response > to this one. If anyone has any issues with these being

Re: [PATCH 4.9 00/27] 4.9.45-stable review

Hi Greg, On 23 August 2017 at 00:43, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 4.9.45 release. > There are 27 patches in this series, all will be posted as a response > to this one. If anyone has any issues with these being applied, please > let me know. >

Re: [PATCH] selftests: memfd: Align STACK_SIZE for ARM AArch64 system

rch/arm64/kernel/process.c#L265 >> >>Signed-off-by: Chunyan Zhang <zhang.chun...@linaro.org> >>Acked-by: Arnd Bergmann <a...@arndb.de> >>Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <shua...@osg.samsung.com> > > Signed-off-by: Orson Zhai <orson.z...@linaro.or

Re: [PATCH] selftests: memfd: Align STACK_SIZE for ARM AArch64 system

c#L265 >> >>Signed-off-by: Chunyan Zhang >>Acked-by: Arnd Bergmann >>Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan > > Signed-off-by: Orson Zhai Please feel free to add my Reviewed-by: Sumit Semwal > --- > tools/testing/selftests/memfd/fuse_test.c | 2 +- > 1 file c

Re: [PATCH 4.9 00/93] 4.9.42-stable review

Hi Greg, On 9 August 2017 at 23:42, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 4.9.42 release. > There are 93 patches in this series, all will be posted as a response > to this one. If anyone has any issues with these being

Re: [PATCH 4.9 00/93] 4.9.42-stable review

Hi Greg, On 9 August 2017 at 23:42, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 4.9.42 release. > There are 93 patches in this series, all will be posted as a response > to this one. If anyone has any issues with these being applied, please > let me know. >

Re: [PATCH 4.9 000/125] 4.9.40-stable review

Hi Greg, On 26 July 2017 at 00:48, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 4.9.40 release. > There are 125 patches in this series, all will be posted as a response > to this one. If anyone has any issues with these being

Re: [PATCH 4.9 000/125] 4.9.40-stable review

Hi Greg, On 26 July 2017 at 00:48, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 4.9.40 release. > There are 125 patches in this series, all will be posted as a response > to this one. If anyone has any issues with these being applied, please > let me know. >

Re: [PATCH 4.9 00/72] 4.9.39-stable review

Hi Greg, On 19 July 2017 at 15:53, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 4.9.39 release. > There are 72 patches in this series, all will be posted as a response > to this one. If anyone has any issues with these being

Re: [PATCH 4.9 00/72] 4.9.39-stable review

Hi Greg, On 19 July 2017 at 15:53, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 4.9.39 release. > There are 72 patches in this series, all will be posted as a response > to this one. If anyone has any issues with these being applied, please > let me know. > >

Re: [PATCH 4.9 00/25] 4.9.38-stable review

Hi Greg, On 13 July 2017 at 21:10, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 4.9.38 release. > There are 25 patches in this series, all will be posted as a response > to this one. If anyone has any issues with these being

Re: [PATCH 4.9 00/25] 4.9.38-stable review

Hi Greg, On 13 July 2017 at 21:10, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 4.9.38 release. > There are 25 patches in this series, all will be posted as a response > to this one. If anyone has any issues with these being applied, please > let me know. > >

Re: [PATCH 4.9 00/41] 4.9.37-stable review

Hi Greg, On 10 July 2017 at 22:40, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 4.9.37 release. > There are 41 patches in this series, all will be posted as a response > to this one. If anyone has any issues with these being

Re: [PATCH 4.9 00/41] 4.9.37-stable review

Hi Greg, On 10 July 2017 at 22:40, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 4.9.37 release. > There are 41 patches in this series, all will be posted as a response > to this one. If anyone has any issues with these being applied, please > let me know. >

Re: seccomp ptrace selftest failures with 4.4-stable [Was: Re: LTS testing with latest kselftests - some failures]

Hi Andy, On 24 June 2017 at 10:13, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > On Thu, Jun 22, 2017 at 07:40:49PM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote: >> Greg, for context, the issue here is that we made what was arguably a >> design error in seccomp's interaction with ptrace. After

Re: seccomp ptrace selftest failures with 4.4-stable [Was: Re: LTS testing with latest kselftests - some failures]

Hi Andy, On 24 June 2017 at 10:13, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > On Thu, Jun 22, 2017 at 07:40:49PM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote: >> Greg, for context, the issue here is that we made what was arguably a >> design error in seccomp's interaction with ptrace. After determining >> that fixing it

Re: [PATCH 4.9 000/172] 4.9.36-stable review

On 4 July 2017 at 13:32, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > On Mon, Jul 03, 2017 at 12:25:48PM -0700, kernelci.org bot wrote: >> stable-rc/linux-4.9.y boot: 130 boots: 5 failed, 112 passed with 13 offline >> (v4.9.35-173-g45949a8fd1df) >> >> Full Boot Summary: >>

Re: [PATCH 4.9 000/172] 4.9.36-stable review

On 4 July 2017 at 13:32, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > On Mon, Jul 03, 2017 at 12:25:48PM -0700, kernelci.org bot wrote: >> stable-rc/linux-4.9.y boot: 130 boots: 5 failed, 112 passed with 13 offline >> (v4.9.35-173-g45949a8fd1df) >> >> Full Boot Summary: >>

Re: [PATCH 4.9 000/172] 4.9.36-stable review

Hi Greg, On 3 July 2017 at 19:03, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 4.9.36 release. > There are 172 patches in this series, all will be posted as a response > to this one. If anyone has any issues with these being

Re: [PATCH 4.9 000/172] 4.9.36-stable review

Hi Greg, On 3 July 2017 at 19:03, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 4.9.36 release. > There are 172 patches in this series, all will be posted as a response > to this one. If anyone has any issues with these being applied, please > let me know. > >

Re: [PATCH 4.9 00/44] 4.9.35-stable review

Hi Greg, On 27 June 2017 at 19:42, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 4.9.35 release. > There are 44 patches in this series, all will be posted as a response > to this one. If anyone has any issues with these being

Re: [PATCH 4.9 00/44] 4.9.35-stable review

Hi Greg, On 27 June 2017 at 19:42, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 4.9.35 release. > There are 44 patches in this series, all will be posted as a response > to this one. If anyone has any issues with these being applied, please > let me know. > >

Re: seccomp ptrace selftest failures with 4.4-stable [Was: Re: LTS testing with latest kselftests - some failures]

ote: >>>> On Thu, Jun 22, 2017 at 10:49 AM, Andy Lutomirski <l...@kernel.org> wrote: >>>>> On Thu, Jun 22, 2017 at 10:09 AM, Shuah Khan <sh...@kernel.org> wrote: >>>>>> On 06/22/2017 10:53 AM, Kees Cook wrote: >>>&

Re: seccomp ptrace selftest failures with 4.4-stable [Was: Re: LTS testing with latest kselftests - some failures]

t 10:49 AM, Andy Lutomirski wrote: >>>>> On Thu, Jun 22, 2017 at 10:09 AM, Shuah Khan wrote: >>>>>> On 06/22/2017 10:53 AM, Kees Cook wrote: >>>>>>> On Thu, Jun 22, 2017 at 9:18 AM, Sumit Semwal >>>>>>> wrote: >>

seccomp ptrace selftest failures with 4.4-stable [Was: Re: LTS testing with latest kselftests - some failures]

Hi Kees, Andy, On 15 June 2017 at 23:26, Sumit Semwal <sumit.sem...@linaro.org> wrote: > 3. 'seccomp ptrace hole closure' patches got added in 4.7 [3] - > feature and test together. > - This one also seems like a security hole being closed, and the > 'feature' could be a ca

seccomp ptrace selftest failures with 4.4-stable [Was: Re: LTS testing with latest kselftests - some failures]

Hi Kees, Andy, On 15 June 2017 at 23:26, Sumit Semwal wrote: > 3. 'seccomp ptrace hole closure' patches got added in 4.7 [3] - > feature and test together. > - This one also seems like a security hole being closed, and the > 'feature' could be a candidate for stable backports, bu

Re: [PATCH 2/2] selftests: lib: prime_numbers: update presence check

Hi Chris, On 20 June 2017 at 17:17, Chris Wilson <ch...@chris-wilson.co.uk> wrote: > Quoting Sumit Semwal (2017-06-19 16:11:33) >> On 19 June 2017 at 20:27, Chris Wilson <ch...@chris-wilson.co.uk> wrote: >> > Quoting Sumit Semwal (2017-06-19 15:46:20) >> >

Re: [PATCH 2/2] selftests: lib: prime_numbers: update presence check

Hi Chris, On 20 June 2017 at 17:17, Chris Wilson wrote: > Quoting Sumit Semwal (2017-06-19 16:11:33) >> On 19 June 2017 at 20:27, Chris Wilson wrote: >> > Quoting Sumit Semwal (2017-06-19 15:46:20) >> >> Hi Chris, >> >> >> >> On 19 June 201

Re: [PATCH 4.9 00/60] 4.9.34-stable review

Hi Greg, On 20 June 2017 at 05:40, Guenter Roeck wrote: > On 06/19/2017 08:16 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: >> >> This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 4.9.34 release. >> There are 60 patches in this series, all will be posted as a response >> to this one. If

Re: [PATCH 4.9 00/60] 4.9.34-stable review

Hi Greg, On 20 June 2017 at 05:40, Guenter Roeck wrote: > On 06/19/2017 08:16 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: >> >> This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 4.9.34 release. >> There are 60 patches in this series, all will be posted as a response >> to this one. If anyone has any

[PATCH v3] selftests: lib: Skip tests on missing test modules

, so use 'modprobe -q -n' to check presence of the module, instead of 'find ..'. v2: Per Shuah's review, search for the module rather than do modprobe. Signed-off-by: Sumit Semwal <sumit.sem...@linaro.org> --- tools/testing/selftests/lib/bitmap.sh | 4 tools/testing/selftests/lib/printf.

[PATCH v3] selftests: lib: Skip tests on missing test modules

, so use 'modprobe -q -n' to check presence of the module, instead of 'find ..'. v2: Per Shuah's review, search for the module rather than do modprobe. Signed-off-by: Sumit Semwal --- tools/testing/selftests/lib/bitmap.sh | 4 tools/testing/selftests/lib/printf.sh | 4 2 files changed, 8

Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] selftests: lib: Skip tests on missing test modules

Hi Kees, On 20 June 2017 at 00:21, Kees Cook <keesc...@chromium.org> wrote: > On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 6:44 AM, Sumit Semwal <sumit.sem...@linaro.org> wrote: >> With older kernels, printf.sh and bitmap.sh fail because they can't find >> the respective test modules they

Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] selftests: lib: Skip tests on missing test modules

Hi Kees, On 20 June 2017 at 00:21, Kees Cook wrote: > On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 6:44 AM, Sumit Semwal wrote: >> With older kernels, printf.sh and bitmap.sh fail because they can't find >> the respective test modules they are looking for. >> >> Add the skip portio

Re: [PATCH 2/2] selftests: lib: prime_numbers: update presence check

On 19 June 2017 at 20:27, Chris Wilson <ch...@chris-wilson.co.uk> wrote: > Quoting Sumit Semwal (2017-06-19 15:46:20) >> Hi Chris, >> >> On 19 June 2017 at 19:21, Chris Wilson <ch...@chris-wilson.co.uk> wrote: >> > Quoting Sumit Semwal (2017-06-19 14:44:32

Re: [PATCH 2/2] selftests: lib: prime_numbers: update presence check

On 19 June 2017 at 20:27, Chris Wilson wrote: > Quoting Sumit Semwal (2017-06-19 15:46:20) >> Hi Chris, >> >> On 19 June 2017 at 19:21, Chris Wilson wrote: >> > Quoting Sumit Semwal (2017-06-19 14:44:32) >> >> The test for prime num

Re: [PATCH 2/2] selftests: lib: prime_numbers: update presence check

Hi Chris, On 19 June 2017 at 19:21, Chris Wilson <ch...@chris-wilson.co.uk> wrote: > Quoting Sumit Semwal (2017-06-19 14:44:32) >> The test for prime numbers doesn't differentiate between missing >> prime_numbers.ko and failure in prime_numbers.ko. >> >>

Re: [PATCH 2/2] selftests: lib: prime_numbers: update presence check

Hi Chris, On 19 June 2017 at 19:21, Chris Wilson wrote: > Quoting Sumit Semwal (2017-06-19 14:44:32) >> The test for prime numbers doesn't differentiate between missing >> prime_numbers.ko and failure in prime_numbers.ko. >> >> Update it to check for presence

[PATCH 2/2] selftests: lib: prime_numbers: update presence check

The test for prime numbers doesn't differentiate between missing prime_numbers.ko and failure in prime_numbers.ko. Update it to check for presence of the file itself to skip, therefore correctly exercising the test failure case. Signed-off-by: Sumit Semwal <sumit.sem...@linaro.org> ---

[PATCH 2/2] selftests: lib: prime_numbers: update presence check

The test for prime numbers doesn't differentiate between missing prime_numbers.ko and failure in prime_numbers.ko. Update it to check for presence of the file itself to skip, therefore correctly exercising the test failure case. Signed-off-by: Sumit Semwal --- tools/testing/selftests/lib

[PATCH v2 1/2] selftests: lib: Skip tests on missing test modules

than do modprobe. Signed-off-by: Sumit Semwal <sumit.sem...@linaro.org> --- tools/testing/selftests/lib/bitmap.sh | 6 ++ tools/testing/selftests/lib/printf.sh | 6 ++ 2 files changed, 12 insertions(+) diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/lib/bitmap.sh b/tools/testing/selftes

[PATCH v2 1/2] selftests: lib: Skip tests on missing test modules

than do modprobe. Signed-off-by: Sumit Semwal --- tools/testing/selftests/lib/bitmap.sh | 6 ++ tools/testing/selftests/lib/printf.sh | 6 ++ 2 files changed, 12 insertions(+) diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/lib/bitmap.sh b/tools/testing/selftests/lib/bitmap.sh index 2da187b6ddad

Re: [PATCH] tools/testing/selftests/sysctl: Add pre-check to the value of writes_strict

ust and compatible with older kernels by checking and > update sysctrl_writes_strict value and restore it when test is done. > > Signed-off-by: Orson Zhai <orson.z...@linaro.org> Please feel free to add my Reviewed-by: Sumit Semwal <sumit.sem...@linaro.org> Tested-by: Sumit Se

Re: [PATCH] tools/testing/selftests/sysctl: Add pre-check to the value of writes_strict

lder kernels by checking and > update sysctrl_writes_strict value and restore it when test is done. > > Signed-off-by: Orson Zhai Please feel free to add my Reviewed-by: Sumit Semwal Tested-by: Sumit Semwal [sumits: tested LTS-4.4 with hikey (arm64) ] > --- > tools/testing/se

Re: LTS testing with latest kselftests - some failures

Hi Alexander, On 16 June 2017 at 12:44, Alexander Alemayhu wrote: > Last time I saw similar kinds of errors gcc libraries were missing. > Can you try rerunning after > > apt-get install -y gcc-multilib g++-multilib Thanks, this was quite helpful, and so now bpf tests

Re: LTS testing with latest kselftests - some failures

Hi Alexander, On 16 June 2017 at 12:44, Alexander Alemayhu wrote: > Last time I saw similar kinds of errors gcc libraries were missing. > Can you try rerunning after > > apt-get install -y gcc-multilib g++-multilib Thanks, this was quite helpful, and so now bpf tests build on x86_64 with

[PATCH] selftests: lib: Skip tests on missing test modules

With older kernels, printf.sh and bitmap.sh fail because they can't find the respective test modules they are looking for. Add the skip portion on missing the respective test_XXX module. Error out the same way as prime_numbers.sh. Signed-off-by: Sumit Semwal <sumit.sem...@linaro.org> ---

[PATCH] selftests: lib: Skip tests on missing test modules

With older kernels, printf.sh and bitmap.sh fail because they can't find the respective test modules they are looking for. Add the skip portion on missing the respective test_XXX module. Error out the same way as prime_numbers.sh. Signed-off-by: Sumit Semwal --- tools/testing/selftests/lib

Re: LTS testing with latest kselftests - some failures

Hi Alexander, On 16 June 2017 at 04:35, Alexander Alemayhu <alexan...@alemayhu.com> wrote: > On Thu, Jun 15, 2017 at 11:26:53PM +0530, Sumit Semwal wrote: >> >> 4. bpf tests: These seem to have build failures in mainline as well - >> I also tried to build kselftest-

Re: LTS testing with latest kselftests - some failures

Hi Alexander, On 16 June 2017 at 04:35, Alexander Alemayhu wrote: > On Thu, Jun 15, 2017 at 11:26:53PM +0530, Sumit Semwal wrote: >> >> 4. bpf tests: These seem to have build failures in mainline as well - >> I also tried to build kselftest-next, but a simple 'make -C >&

LTS testing with latest kselftests - some failures

Hello Greg, Shuah, While testing 4.4.y and 4.9.y LTS kernels with latest kselftest, we found a couple more test failures due to test-kernel mismatch: 1. firmware tests: - linux 4.5 [1] and 4.10 [2] added a few updates to tests, and related updates to lib/test_firmware.c to improve the tests.

LTS testing with latest kselftests - some failures

Hello Greg, Shuah, While testing 4.4.y and 4.9.y LTS kernels with latest kselftest, we found a couple more test failures due to test-kernel mismatch: 1. firmware tests: - linux 4.5 [1] and 4.10 [2] added a few updates to tests, and related updates to lib/test_firmware.c to improve the tests.

Re: linux-next: Tree for Jun 9

Hi Stephen, On 9 June 2017 at 12:12, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi all, > < snip > > You can see which trees have been included by looking in the Next/Trees > file in the source. There are also quilt-import.log and merge.log > files in the Next directory. Between each

Re: linux-next: Tree for Jun 9

Hi Stephen, On 9 June 2017 at 12:12, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi all, > < snip > > You can see which trees have been included by looking in the Next/Trees > file in the source. There are also quilt-import.log and merge.log > files in the Next directory. Between each merge, the tree was built

Re: kselftest backports?

Hi Greg, On 8 June 2017 at 22:14, Greg KH wrote: > On Thu, Jun 08, 2017 at 10:37:55AM -0500, Tom Gall wrote: >> We've been running kselftests for ARM and x86 hardware in an effort to >> detect regressions in various kernels including LTS and candidate >> patches. >>

Re: kselftest backports?

Hi Greg, On 8 June 2017 at 22:14, Greg KH wrote: > On Thu, Jun 08, 2017 at 10:37:55AM -0500, Tom Gall wrote: >> We've been running kselftests for ARM and x86 hardware in an effort to >> detect regressions in various kernels including LTS and candidate >> patches. >> >> One general question we've

Re: [PATCH 0/3] staging: android: ion: Minor clean ups and fixes

neja (3): > staging: android: ion: Remove unused members from ion_buffer > staging: android: ion: Remove ION_FLAG_CACHED_NEEDS_SYNC > staging: android: ion: Avoid calling free_duped_table() twice > Thanks for these patches! Please feel free to add my Reviewed-by: Sumit Semwal <

Re: [PATCH 0/3] staging: android: ion: Minor clean ups and fixes

droid: ion: Remove unused members from ion_buffer > staging: android: ion: Remove ION_FLAG_CACHED_NEEDS_SYNC > staging: android: ion: Avoid calling free_duped_table() twice > Thanks for these patches! Please feel free to add my Reviewed-by: Sumit Semwal > drivers/s

Re: [PATCHv2] drm/prime: Forward declare struct device

labb...@redhat.com> Thanks for the patch; feel free to add my Reviewed-by: Sumit Semwal <sumit.sem...@linaro.org> > --- > v2: Switch to foward declaration instead of including a header. > --- > include/drm/drm_prime.h | 2 ++ > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+) > &g

Re: [PATCHv2] drm/prime: Forward declare struct device

t device' declared inside > parameter list will not be visible outside of this definition or > declaration > struct device *attach_dev); > ^~ > > Forward declare it. > > Signed-off-by: Laura Abbott Thanks for the patch; fee

<    1   2   3   4   5   >