[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAK8P3a2qgLTbud+2Fw8Rr0RXV8-xwBMiBg3hFuqqBinN1zS90A@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2019 10:01:16 +0200
From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
Cc: Michal Suchanek <msuchanek@...e.de>,
linuxppc-dev <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>,
Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>,
David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
Breno Leitao <leitao@...ian.org>,
Michael Neuling <mikey@...ling.org>,
Nicolai Stange <nstange@...e.de>,
Allison Randal <allison@...utok.net>,
Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
Joel Stanley <joel@....id.au>,
Firoz Khan <firoz.khan@...aro.org>,
Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@...il.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Christian Brauner <christian@...uner.io>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
Andrew Donnellan <andrew.donnellan@....ibm.com>,
Hari Bathini <hbathini@...ux.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/4] powerpc/64: make buildable without CONFIG_COMPAT
On Thu, Aug 29, 2019 at 8:46 AM Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org> wrote:
> > @@ -277,7 +277,7 @@ static void do_signal(struct task_struct *tsk)
> >
> > rseq_signal_deliver(&ksig, tsk->thread.regs);
> >
> > - if (is32) {
> > + if ((IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PPC32) || IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_COMPAT)) && is32) {
>
> I think we should fix the is_32bit_task definitions instead so that
> callers don't need this mess. I'd suggest something like:
>
> #ifdef CONFIG_COMPAT
> #define is_32bit_task() test_thread_flag(TIF_32BIT)
> #else
> #define is_32bit_task() IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PPC32)
> #endif
Are there actually any (correct) uses of is_32bit_task() outside of
#ifdef CONFIG_PPC64?
I suspect most if not all could be changed to the generic
in_compat_syscall() that we use outside of architecture specific
code.
Arnd
Powered by blists - more mailing lists