On Fri, Jul 31, 2015 at 5:47 AM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
>>
>> > I fixed this up.
>>
>> Another build fix was needed for:
>>
>> arch/x86/mm/fault.c: In function ‘check_v8086_mode’:
>> arch/x86/mm/fault.c:319:39: error: ‘struct thread_struct’ has no member
>> named ‘vm86
* Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> > I fixed this up.
>
> Another build fix was needed for:
>
> arch/x86/mm/fault.c: In function ‘check_v8086_mode’:
> arch/x86/mm/fault.c:319:39: error: ‘struct thread_struct’ has no member
> named ‘vm86’
>
> that's on 32-bit defconfig.
A third one occurs in:
d
* Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Brian Gerst wrote:
>
> > --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/vm86.h
> > +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/vm86.h
>
> > +static inline void save_v86_state(struct kernel_vm86_regs *, int) { }
> > +
>
> So this is not a valid inline function and the patches were clearly not built
>
* Brian Gerst wrote:
> --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/vm86.h
> +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/vm86.h
> +static inline void save_v86_state(struct kernel_vm86_regs *, int) { }
> +
So this is not a valid inline function and the patches were clearly not built
with
!VM86 such as 64-bit defconfig:
In fi
On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 10:47 AM, Linus Torvalds
wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 10:36 AM, Brian Gerst wrote:
>>
>> I think I remember now what the issue was. Since entering vm86 mode
>> uses force_iret(), the work_pending code path was being taken. I had
>> to move the call to save_v86_state
On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 10:36 AM, Brian Gerst wrote:
>
> I think I remember now what the issue was. Since entering vm86 mode
> uses force_iret(), the work_pending code path was being taken. I had
> to move the call to save_v86_state out of here to handle_signal(),
> otherwise it would just resto
On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 1:16 PM, Linus Torvalds
wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 10:14 AM, Brian Gerst wrote:
>>
>> I think it was causing signal handling to fail, but I can't remember
>> exactly.
>
> Ugh.
>
> If that hunk made a difference, then there is something wrong with
> your patch-series.
On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 10:14 AM, Brian Gerst wrote:
>
> I think it was causing signal handling to fail, but I can't remember
> exactly.
Ugh.
If that hunk made a difference, then there is something wrong with
your patch-series. So please double-check.
Linus
--
To unsubscribe fro
On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 11:50 AM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 10:41 PM, Brian Gerst wrote:
>> Change to use the normal pt_regs area to enter and exit vm86 mode. This is
>> done by increasing the padding at the top of the stack to make room for the
>> extra vm86 segment slots
On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 10:41 PM, Brian Gerst wrote:
> Change to use the normal pt_regs area to enter and exit vm86 mode. This is
> done by increasing the padding at the top of the stack to make room for the
> extra vm86 segment slots in the IRET frame. It then saves the 32-bit regs
> in the off
10 matches
Mail list logo
