Hi
On Mon, Sep 1, 2014 at 7:16 PM, Pranith Kumar wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 1, 2014 at 11:31 AM, David Herrmann wrote:
>
>>
>> Btw., the original patch (wire up syscalls) can be applied unchanged.
>>
>
> Great! Can I use that as an Ack-by? I will send in the patch with
> updated changelog.
Sure, go
On Mon, Sep 1, 2014 at 11:31 AM, David Herrmann wrote:
>
> Btw., the original patch (wire up syscalls) can be applied unchanged.
>
Great! Can I use that as an Ack-by? I will send in the patch with
updated changelog.
--
Pranith
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe
Hi
On Mon, Sep 1, 2014 at 5:21 PM, Pranith Kumar wrote:
> Hi David,
>
> On Mon, Sep 1, 2014 at 7:33 AM, David Herrmann wrote:
>>
>> Nice catch. We changed 'flags' from u64 to "unsigned int" in the last
>> revision of the series. Patch looks good, but I'd prefer using
>> "unsigned int" as type,
Hi David,
On Mon, Sep 1, 2014 at 7:33 AM, David Herrmann wrote:
>
> Nice catch. We changed 'flags' from u64 to "unsigned int" in the last
> revision of the series. Patch looks good, but I'd prefer using
> "unsigned int" as type, instead of __u32. Just to be consistent with
> the syscall
Hi
On Sun, Aug 31, 2014 at 7:51 PM, Pranith Kumar wrote:
>
> On 08/31/2014 10:34 AM, David Herrmann wrote:
>> The only arch-dependent code for memfd_test.c is the syscall invocation:
>> memfd_create(const char *name, unsigned int flags);
>> via glibc as:
>> syscall(__NR_memfd_create,
Hi
On Sun, Aug 31, 2014 at 7:51 PM, Pranith Kumar bobby.pr...@gmail.com wrote:
On 08/31/2014 10:34 AM, David Herrmann wrote:
The only arch-dependent code for memfd_test.c is the syscall invocation:
memfd_create(const char *name, unsigned int flags);
via glibc as:
Hi David,
On Mon, Sep 1, 2014 at 7:33 AM, David Herrmann dh.herrm...@gmail.com wrote:
Nice catch. We changed 'flags' from u64 to unsigned int in the last
revision of the series. Patch looks good, but I'd prefer using
unsigned int as type, instead of __u32. Just to be consistent with
the
Hi
On Mon, Sep 1, 2014 at 5:21 PM, Pranith Kumar bobby.pr...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi David,
On Mon, Sep 1, 2014 at 7:33 AM, David Herrmann dh.herrm...@gmail.com wrote:
Nice catch. We changed 'flags' from u64 to unsigned int in the last
revision of the series. Patch looks good, but I'd prefer
On Mon, Sep 1, 2014 at 11:31 AM, David Herrmann dh.herrm...@gmail.com wrote:
Btw., the original patch (wire up syscalls) can be applied unchanged.
Great! Can I use that as an Ack-by? I will send in the patch with
updated changelog.
--
Pranith
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line
Hi
On Mon, Sep 1, 2014 at 7:16 PM, Pranith Kumar bobby.pr...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Sep 1, 2014 at 11:31 AM, David Herrmann dh.herrm...@gmail.com wrote:
Btw., the original patch (wire up syscalls) can be applied unchanged.
Great! Can I use that as an Ack-by? I will send in the patch with
On 08/31/2014 10:34 AM, David Herrmann wrote:
> The only arch-dependent code for memfd_test.c is the syscall invocation:
> memfd_create(const char *name, unsigned int flags);
> via glibc as:
> syscall(__NR_memfd_create, name, flags);
>
> Can you debug your test-run (maybe via simple
Hi
On Sun, Aug 31, 2014 at 2:52 PM, Pranith Kumar wrote:
> Hi Geert,
>
> On Sun, Aug 31, 2014 at 4:53 AM, Geert Uytterhoeven
> wrote:
>> Hi Pranith,
>>
>> On Sat, Aug 30, 2014 at 5:36 AM, Pranith Kumar wrote:
>>> I see that the three syscalls seccomp, getrandom and memfd_create are not
>>>
Hi Pranith,
On Sun, Aug 31, 2014 at 2:52 PM, Pranith Kumar wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 31, 2014 at 4:53 AM, Geert Uytterhoeven
> wrote:
>> On Sat, Aug 30, 2014 at 5:36 AM, Pranith Kumar wrote:
>>> I see that the three syscalls seccomp, getrandom and memfd_create are not
>>> wired
>>> because of
Hi Geert,
On Sun, Aug 31, 2014 at 4:53 AM, Geert Uytterhoeven
wrote:
> Hi Pranith,
>
> On Sat, Aug 30, 2014 at 5:36 AM, Pranith Kumar wrote:
>> I see that the three syscalls seccomp, getrandom and memfd_create are not
>> wired
>> because of which we get a warning while compilation.
>>
>> So I
Hi Pranith,
On Sat, Aug 30, 2014 at 5:36 AM, Pranith Kumar wrote:
> I see that the three syscalls seccomp, getrandom and memfd_create are not
> wired
> because of which we get a warning while compilation.
>
> So I wired them up in this patch. What else needs to be done? I tried the
> memfd_test
Hi Pranith,
On Sat, Aug 30, 2014 at 5:36 AM, Pranith Kumar bobby.pr...@gmail.com wrote:
I see that the three syscalls seccomp, getrandom and memfd_create are not
wired
because of which we get a warning while compilation.
So I wired them up in this patch. What else needs to be done? I tried
Hi Geert,
On Sun, Aug 31, 2014 at 4:53 AM, Geert Uytterhoeven
ge...@linux-m68k.org wrote:
Hi Pranith,
On Sat, Aug 30, 2014 at 5:36 AM, Pranith Kumar bobby.pr...@gmail.com wrote:
I see that the three syscalls seccomp, getrandom and memfd_create are not
wired
because of which we get a
Hi Pranith,
On Sun, Aug 31, 2014 at 2:52 PM, Pranith Kumar bobby.pr...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Aug 31, 2014 at 4:53 AM, Geert Uytterhoeven
ge...@linux-m68k.org wrote:
On Sat, Aug 30, 2014 at 5:36 AM, Pranith Kumar bobby.pr...@gmail.com wrote:
I see that the three syscalls seccomp, getrandom
Hi
On Sun, Aug 31, 2014 at 2:52 PM, Pranith Kumar bobby.pr...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Geert,
On Sun, Aug 31, 2014 at 4:53 AM, Geert Uytterhoeven
ge...@linux-m68k.org wrote:
Hi Pranith,
On Sat, Aug 30, 2014 at 5:36 AM, Pranith Kumar bobby.pr...@gmail.com wrote:
I see that the three syscalls
On 08/31/2014 10:34 AM, David Herrmann wrote:
The only arch-dependent code for memfd_test.c is the syscall invocation:
memfd_create(const char *name, unsigned int flags);
via glibc as:
syscall(__NR_memfd_create, name, flags);
Can you debug your test-run (maybe via simple printk() in
I see that the three syscalls seccomp, getrandom and memfd_create are not wired
because of which we get a warning while compilation.
So I wired them up in this patch. What else needs to be done? I tried the
memfd_test after compiling this kernel, but it is failing. What am I missing for
this to
I see that the three syscalls seccomp, getrandom and memfd_create are not wired
because of which we get a warning while compilation.
So I wired them up in this patch. What else needs to be done? I tried the
memfd_test after compiling this kernel, but it is failing. What am I missing for
this to
22 matches
Mail list logo
