[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <8761fvqt2i.fsf@tassilo.jf.intel.com>
Date: Tue, 07 Oct 2014 17:54:45 -0700
From: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
To: David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: PERF_EVENT_IOC_SET_FILTER has different values based on bitness
David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com> writes:
> On 10/7/14, 6:50 PM, Andi Kleen wrote:
>> David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com> writes:
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/kernel/events/core.c b/kernel/events/core.c
>>>> index 963bf139e2b2..c805132ac1cf 100644
>>>> --- a/kernel/events/core.c
>>>> +++ b/kernel/events/core.c
>>>> @@ -3714,6 +3714,7 @@ static long perf_ioctl(struct file *file, unsigned
>>>> int cmd, unsigned long arg)
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>> case PERF_EVENT_IOC_SET_FILTER:
>>>> + case PERF_EVENT_IOC_SET_FILTER_32:
>>>> return perf_event_set_filter(event, (void __user *)arg);
>>>>
>>>> default:
>>>>
>>>
>>> Oh, PERF_EVENT_IOC_ID has the same problem:
>>>
>>> #define PERF_EVENT_IOC_ID _IOR('$', 7, __u64 *)
>>
>> The right way is to add a compat_perf_ioctl()
>
> Sure, looked into that way as well. But SET_FILTER and IOC_ID will
> still compile to the same values for a 64-bit kernel.
Sure you have to add/use the new defines too.
-Andi
--
ak@...ux.intel.com -- Speaking for myself only
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists