Re: ia64 exceptions (Re: [RFC][CFT][PATCHSET v1] uaccess unification)

On Wed, Apr 05, 2017 at 11:44:23AM -0700, Tony Luck wrote: > On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 1:08 AM, Al Viro wrote: > > ... and sure enough, on generic kernel (CONFIG_ITANIUM) that yields a nice > > shiny oops at precisely that insn. > > The right fix here might be to delete all

Re: ia64 exceptions (Re: [RFC][CFT][PATCHSET v1] uaccess unification)

On Wed, Apr 05, 2017 at 11:44:23AM -0700, Tony Luck wrote: > On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 1:08 AM, Al Viro wrote: > > ... and sure enough, on generic kernel (CONFIG_ITANIUM) that yields a nice > > shiny oops at precisely that insn. > > The right fix here might be to delete all the CONFIG_ITANIUM

Re: ia64 exceptions (Re: [RFC][CFT][PATCHSET v1] uaccess unification)

On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 1:08 AM, Al Viro wrote: > ... and sure enough, on generic kernel (CONFIG_ITANIUM) that yields a nice > shiny oops at precisely that insn. The right fix here might be to delete all the CONFIG_ITANIUM paths. I doubt that anyone is still running

Re: ia64 exceptions (Re: [RFC][CFT][PATCHSET v1] uaccess unification)

On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 1:08 AM, Al Viro wrote: > ... and sure enough, on generic kernel (CONFIG_ITANIUM) that yields a nice > shiny oops at precisely that insn. The right fix here might be to delete all the CONFIG_ITANIUM paths. I doubt that anyone is still running upstream kernels on Merced

Re: ia64 exceptions (Re: [RFC][CFT][PATCHSET v1] uaccess unification)

On Wed, Apr 05, 2017 at 06:05:08AM +0100, Al Viro wrote: > Speaking of ia64: copy_user.S contains the following oddity: > 2: > EX(.failure_in3,(p16) ld8 val1[0]=[src1],16) > (p16) ld8 val2[0]=[src2],16 > > src1 is 16-byte aligned, src2 is src1 + 8. > > What guarantees that we can't

Re: ia64 exceptions (Re: [RFC][CFT][PATCHSET v1] uaccess unification)

On Wed, Apr 05, 2017 at 06:05:08AM +0100, Al Viro wrote: > Speaking of ia64: copy_user.S contains the following oddity: > 2: > EX(.failure_in3,(p16) ld8 val1[0]=[src1],16) > (p16) ld8 val2[0]=[src2],16 > > src1 is 16-byte aligned, src2 is src1 + 8. > > What guarantees that we can't

ia64 exceptions (Re: [RFC][CFT][PATCHSET v1] uaccess unification)

On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 06:57:06AM +0100, Al Viro wrote: > And again, metag and ia64 parts are simply not there - both architectures > zero-pad in __copy_from_user_inatomic() and that really needs fixing. > In case of metag there's __copy_to_user() breakage as well, AFAICS, and > I've been unable

ia64 exceptions (Re: [RFC][CFT][PATCHSET v1] uaccess unification)

On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 06:57:06AM +0100, Al Viro wrote: > And again, metag and ia64 parts are simply not there - both architectures > zero-pad in __copy_from_user_inatomic() and that really needs fixing. > In case of metag there's __copy_to_user() breakage as well, AFAICS, and > I've been unable