On Wed, 20 Apr 2005, Rob Landley wrote:
By the way, I've toyed with the idea of running this sucker in an otherwise
empty chroot environment (/proc/self/fd is likely to exist and have fairly
uninteresting contents. As a chroot environment, it just has symlinks that
point to nothing), but to chroot
On Sunday 24 April 2005 19:45, Heiko Przybyl wrote:
> Same problem here (i'm using gentoo, too), but with 2.6.11 and 2.6.12-rc3
> (both vanilla-sources from kernel.org)
>
> gdb:
>
> Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.
> 0x6023a788 in __libc_setup_tls () at swab.h:134
> 134 {
>
CC: Jens Axboe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Use the set_disk_ro() API when the backing file is read-only, to mark the disk
read-only, during the ->open(). The current hack does not work when doing a
mount -o remount.
Also, upgrade some warnings to WARN_ON(1) statements. They should actually
become BUG()s
Add some commentary about UML internals, for a strange trick.
Signed-off-by: Paolo 'Blaisorblade' Giarrusso <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
linux-2.6.12-paolo/include/asm-um/processor-generic.h |4
1 files changed, 4 insertions(+)
diff -puN include/asm-um/processor-generic.h~uml-commentary-ab
On Sunday 24 April 2005 18:51, Jeff Dike wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 24, 2005 at 04:44:37PM +0200, Blaisorblade wrote:
> > Btw, many of the code movement things are just cut'n'paste things, so for
> > them there is no reason to delay them. Now we are going to merge them for
> > 2.6.13-rc1 (for .12 it's to
Reuse asm-x86-64/unistd.h to build our syscall table, like x86-64 already
does.
Like for i386, we must add some #defines for all the (right!) changes
UML does to x86-64 syscall table.
Note: I noted a bogus:
[ __NR_sched_yield ] = (syscall_handler_t *) yield,
while doing this patch (whic
From: Paolo 'Blaisorblade' Giarrusso <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Use this:
.set_page_dirty = __set_page_dirty_nobuffers,
We already dropped the inclusion of , and we don't have
a backing block device for this FS.
"Without having looked at it, I'm sure that hostfs does not use
buffer_heads. So
Fix some console locking problems (including scheduling in atomic) and various
reorderings and cleanup in that code. Not yet ready for 2.6.12 probably.
Signed-off-by: Paolo 'Blaisorblade' Giarrusso <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
linux-2.6.12-paolo/arch/um/drivers/chan_kern.c | 16 -
linux-2.6.12
Fix the moved syscall table for the x86_64 SUBARCH:
*) redirect __NR_chown and such to versions aware of 32-bit UIDs,
*) avoid the useless hack for sys_nfsservctl,
*) use sys_sendfile64 in the table rather than sys_sendfile.
*) __NR_uselib is sys_ni_syscall on x86_64 (which does not support A.OUT)
Split the i386 entry.S files into entry.S and syscall_table.S which
is included in the previous one (so actually there is no difference between
them) and use the syscall_table.S in the UML build, instead of tracking by
hand the syscall table changes (which is inherently error-prone).
We must only
This is the first of a series of 7 invasive patches for the -mm tree, which
are to be reviewed (not only by UML folks), and possibly merged for the
2.6.13 cycle.
The first one splits the i386 syscall table out of entry.S, without any real
change for them (the file is included in the old place);
GCC 2.95 uses __va_copy instead of va_copy. Handle it inside compiler.h
instead of in a casual file, and avoid the risk that this breaks with a
newer compiler (which it could do).
Signed-off-by: Paolo 'Blaisorblade' Giarrusso <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
linux-2.6.12-paolo/arch/um/kernel/skas/uacces
From: Rob Landley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Old versions of sed from 1998 (predating the first release of gcc 2.95, but
still in use by debian stable) don't understand the single-line version of
the sed append command. Since newer versions of sed still understand the...
ahem, "vintage" form of the
This trick is useless, because sys_ni.c will handle this problem by itself,
like it does even on UML for other syscalls.
Also, it does not provide the NFSD syscall when NFSD is compiled as a module,
which is a big problem.
This should be merged currently in both 2.6.11-stable and the current tree
*) Fix some problems with usage of $(targets) (sometimes missing, sometimes
used badly) that trigger partial rebuilds when doing a rebuild.
*) At that purpose, also factor out some common code for symlinks creation.
*) Fix a x86-64 build warning, caused by -L/usr/lib, which is anyway useless,
a
Cleanup: make an inline of this empty proc.
Signed-off-by: Paolo 'Blaisorblade' Giarrusso <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
linux-2.6.12-paolo/arch/um/kernel/process_kern.c |4
linux-2.6.12-paolo/include/asm-um/processor-generic.h |6 +-
2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions
We want to make possible, for the user, to enable the i586 AES implementation.
This requires a restructure.
1) Add a CONFIG_UML_X86 to notify that we are building a UML for i386.
2) Rename CONFIG_64_BIT to CONFIG_64BIT as is used for all other archs
3) Tell crypto/Kconfig that UML_X86 is as good
Same problem here (i'm using gentoo, too), but with 2.6.11 and 2.6.12-rc3
(both vanilla-sources from kernel.org)
gdb:
Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.
0x6023a788 in __libc_setup_tls () at swab.h:134
134 {
(gdb) tb
Breakpoint 1 at 0x6023a788: file swab.h, line 134.
(gdb) b
On Sun, Apr 24, 2005 at 04:44:37PM +0200, Blaisorblade wrote:
> The patch moving add_arg() was *before* the os-* work, so you might move (if
> needed, which I don't know) it again to os-Linux/util.c if you want (which
> didn't exist at that time). It came from arch/um/kernel/user_util.c, in fact.
On Friday 22 April 2005 03:32, Jeff Dike wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 06, 2005 at 03:27:50PM +0200, Bodo Stroesser wrote:
> > Here are the patches (tarball attached), that I've applied to
> > UML 2.6.11 + incrementals, before adding s390-files.
> > These patches are tested a bit on x86, but not on x86_64.
On Saturday 23 April 2005 20:40, kraehe wrote:
> Moin Guru's,
>
> I've just tried that, 2.4.30 with uml-2.4.28-bs2-pre11.patch works
> on a 2.6.11.7-amd64 host without any SKAS patches. So TT mode is
> fine.
Well, fine. SKAS64 still does not work yet, with any guest. I don't know yet
what th
On Wednesday 20 April 2005 12:06, Rob Landley wrote:
> http://www.landley.net/code/firmware/notes.html
>
> It's a ~80 meg tarball (half of which is the gcc, binutils, and
> linux-2.6.11 source tarballs) on a friend's machine, so don't hit the poor
> server too hard. I intend to move it to a faster
22 matches
Mail list logo
