Re: in_compat_syscall() returns from kernel thread for X86_32.

2019-01-11 Thread Pavel Machek
On Wed 2018-10-24 10:32:37, Theodore Y. Ts'o wrote: > On Wed, Oct 24, 2018 at 09:15:34AM -0400, Theodore Y. Ts'o wrote: > > At least for ext4, the primary problem is that we want to use a 64-bit > > telldir/seekdir cookie if all 64-bits will make it to user space, and > > a 32-bit telldir cookie

Re: in_compat_syscall() returns from kernel thread for X86_32.

2018-10-24 Thread Andy Lutomirski
> On Oct 24, 2018, at 8:46 PM, NeilBrown wrote: > >> On Wed, Oct 24 2018, Theodore Y. Ts'o wrote: >> >>> On Wed, Oct 24, 2018 at 12:47:57PM +1100, NeilBrown wrote: >>> >>> I doubt it was copied - more likely independent evolution. >>> But on reflection, I see that it is probably reasonable

Re: in_compat_syscall() returns from kernel thread for X86_32.

2018-10-24 Thread Andy Lutomirski
> On Oct 24, 2018, at 8:46 PM, NeilBrown wrote: > >> On Wed, Oct 24 2018, Theodore Y. Ts'o wrote: >> >>> On Wed, Oct 24, 2018 at 12:47:57PM +1100, NeilBrown wrote: >>> >>> I doubt it was copied - more likely independent evolution. >>> But on reflection, I see that it is probably reasonable

Re: in_compat_syscall() returns from kernel thread for X86_32.

2018-10-24 Thread NeilBrown
On Wed, Oct 24 2018, Theodore Y. Ts'o wrote: > On Wed, Oct 24, 2018 at 12:47:57PM +1100, NeilBrown wrote: >> >> I doubt it was copied - more likely independent evolution. >> But on reflection, I see that it is probably reasonable that it >> shouldn't be used this way - or at all in this context.

Re: in_compat_syscall() returns from kernel thread for X86_32.

2018-10-24 Thread NeilBrown
On Wed, Oct 24 2018, Theodore Y. Ts'o wrote: > On Wed, Oct 24, 2018 at 12:47:57PM +1100, NeilBrown wrote: >> >> I doubt it was copied - more likely independent evolution. >> But on reflection, I see that it is probably reasonable that it >> shouldn't be used this way - or at all in this context.

Re: in_compat_syscall() returns from kernel thread for X86_32.

2018-10-24 Thread Theodore Y. Ts'o
On Wed, Oct 24, 2018 at 09:15:34AM -0400, Theodore Y. Ts'o wrote: > At least for ext4, the primary problem is that we want to use a 64-bit > telldir/seekdir cookie if all 64-bits will make it to user space, and > a 32-bit telldir cookie if only 32 bits will make it userspace. This > impacts NFS

Re: in_compat_syscall() returns from kernel thread for X86_32.

2018-10-24 Thread Theodore Y. Ts'o
On Wed, Oct 24, 2018 at 09:15:34AM -0400, Theodore Y. Ts'o wrote: > At least for ext4, the primary problem is that we want to use a 64-bit > telldir/seekdir cookie if all 64-bits will make it to user space, and > a 32-bit telldir cookie if only 32 bits will make it userspace. This > impacts NFS

Re: in_compat_syscall() returns from kernel thread for X86_32.

2018-10-24 Thread Theodore Y. Ts'o
On Wed, Oct 24, 2018 at 12:47:57PM +1100, NeilBrown wrote: > > I doubt it was copied - more likely independent evolution. > But on reflection, I see that it is probably reasonable that it > shouldn't be used this way - or at all in this context. > I'll try to understand what the issues really are

Re: in_compat_syscall() returns from kernel thread for X86_32.

2018-10-24 Thread Theodore Y. Ts'o
On Wed, Oct 24, 2018 at 12:47:57PM +1100, NeilBrown wrote: > > I doubt it was copied - more likely independent evolution. > But on reflection, I see that it is probably reasonable that it > shouldn't be used this way - or at all in this context. > I'll try to understand what the issues really are

Re: in_compat_syscall() returns from kernel thread for X86_32.

2018-10-23 Thread NeilBrown
On Thu, Oct 18 2018, Andy Lutomirski wrote: > On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 9:36 PM NeilBrown wrote: >> >> On Wed, Oct 17 2018, Andy Lutomirski wrote: >> >> > On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 6:48 PM NeilBrown wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> Was: Re: [tip:x86/asm] x86/entry: Rename is_{ia32,x32}_task() to >> >>

Re: in_compat_syscall() returns from kernel thread for X86_32.

2018-10-23 Thread NeilBrown
On Thu, Oct 18 2018, Andy Lutomirski wrote: > On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 9:36 PM NeilBrown wrote: >> >> On Wed, Oct 17 2018, Andy Lutomirski wrote: >> >> > On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 6:48 PM NeilBrown wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> Was: Re: [tip:x86/asm] x86/entry: Rename is_{ia32,x32}_task() to >> >>

Re: in_compat_syscall() returns from kernel thread for X86_32.

2018-10-20 Thread Andy Lutomirski
> On Oct 19, 2018, at 11:02 PM, Andreas Dilger wrote: > >> On Oct 18, 2018, at 11:26 AM, Andy Lutomirski wrote: >> >>> On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 9:36 PM NeilBrown wrote: >>> On Wed, Oct 17 2018, Andy Lutomirski wrote: > On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 6:48 PM NeilBrown wrote: >

Re: in_compat_syscall() returns from kernel thread for X86_32.

2018-10-20 Thread Andy Lutomirski
> On Oct 19, 2018, at 11:02 PM, Andreas Dilger wrote: > >> On Oct 18, 2018, at 11:26 AM, Andy Lutomirski wrote: >> >>> On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 9:36 PM NeilBrown wrote: >>> On Wed, Oct 17 2018, Andy Lutomirski wrote: > On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 6:48 PM NeilBrown wrote: >

Re: in_compat_syscall() returns from kernel thread for X86_32.

2018-10-20 Thread Andreas Dilger
On Oct 18, 2018, at 11:26 AM, Andy Lutomirski wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 9:36 PM NeilBrown wrote: >> >> On Wed, Oct 17 2018, Andy Lutomirski wrote: >> >>> On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 6:48 PM NeilBrown wrote: Was: Re: [tip:x86/asm] x86/entry: Rename is_{ia32,x32}_task()

Re: in_compat_syscall() returns from kernel thread for X86_32.

2018-10-20 Thread Andreas Dilger
On Oct 18, 2018, at 11:26 AM, Andy Lutomirski wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 9:36 PM NeilBrown wrote: >> >> On Wed, Oct 17 2018, Andy Lutomirski wrote: >> >>> On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 6:48 PM NeilBrown wrote: Was: Re: [tip:x86/asm] x86/entry: Rename is_{ia32,x32}_task()

Re: in_compat_syscall() returns from kernel thread for X86_32.

2018-10-18 Thread Andy Lutomirski
On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 9:36 PM NeilBrown wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 17 2018, Andy Lutomirski wrote: > > > On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 6:48 PM NeilBrown wrote: > >> > >> > >> Was: Re: [tip:x86/asm] x86/entry: Rename is_{ia32,x32}_task() to > >> in_{ia32,x32}_syscall() > >> On Tue, Apr 19 2016, tip-bot

Re: in_compat_syscall() returns from kernel thread for X86_32.

2018-10-18 Thread Andy Lutomirski
On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 9:36 PM NeilBrown wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 17 2018, Andy Lutomirski wrote: > > > On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 6:48 PM NeilBrown wrote: > >> > >> > >> Was: Re: [tip:x86/asm] x86/entry: Rename is_{ia32,x32}_task() to > >> in_{ia32,x32}_syscall() > >> On Tue, Apr 19 2016, tip-bot

Re: in_compat_syscall() returns from kernel thread for X86_32.

2018-10-17 Thread NeilBrown
On Wed, Oct 17 2018, Andy Lutomirski wrote: > On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 6:48 PM NeilBrown wrote: >> >> >> Was: Re: [tip:x86/asm] x86/entry: Rename is_{ia32,x32}_task() to >> in_{ia32,x32}_syscall() >> On Tue, Apr 19 2016, tip-bot for Dmitry Safonov wrote: >> >> > Commit-ID:

Re: in_compat_syscall() returns from kernel thread for X86_32.

2018-10-17 Thread NeilBrown
On Wed, Oct 17 2018, Andy Lutomirski wrote: > On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 6:48 PM NeilBrown wrote: >> >> >> Was: Re: [tip:x86/asm] x86/entry: Rename is_{ia32,x32}_task() to >> in_{ia32,x32}_syscall() >> On Tue, Apr 19 2016, tip-bot for Dmitry Safonov wrote: >> >> > Commit-ID:

Re: in_compat_syscall() returns from kernel thread for X86_32.

2018-10-17 Thread Al Viro
On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 07:37:42PM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote: > I could get on board with: > > ({WARN_ON_ONCE(current->flags & PF_KTHREAD); true}) > > The point of these accessors is to be used *in a syscall*. > > What on Earth is Lustre doing that makes it have this problem? Plays

Re: in_compat_syscall() returns from kernel thread for X86_32.

2018-10-17 Thread Al Viro
On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 07:37:42PM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote: > I could get on board with: > > ({WARN_ON_ONCE(current->flags & PF_KTHREAD); true}) > > The point of these accessors is to be used *in a syscall*. > > What on Earth is Lustre doing that makes it have this problem? Plays

Re: in_compat_syscall() returns from kernel thread for X86_32.

2018-10-17 Thread Andy Lutomirski
On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 6:48 PM NeilBrown wrote: > > > Was: Re: [tip:x86/asm] x86/entry: Rename is_{ia32,x32}_task() to > in_{ia32,x32}_syscall() > On Tue, Apr 19 2016, tip-bot for Dmitry Safonov wrote: > > > Commit-ID: abfb9498ee1327f534df92a7ecaea81a85913bae > > Gitweb: > >

Re: in_compat_syscall() returns from kernel thread for X86_32.

2018-10-17 Thread Andy Lutomirski
On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 6:48 PM NeilBrown wrote: > > > Was: Re: [tip:x86/asm] x86/entry: Rename is_{ia32,x32}_task() to > in_{ia32,x32}_syscall() > On Tue, Apr 19 2016, tip-bot for Dmitry Safonov wrote: > > > Commit-ID: abfb9498ee1327f534df92a7ecaea81a85913bae > > Gitweb: > >