[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <758324b9-203b-ec4b-affc-a30aefc9ea23@c-s.fr>
Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2019 21:36:11 +0200
From: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@....fr>
To: Michal Suchánek <msuchanek@...e.de>
Cc: linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org,
Madhavan Srinivasan <maddy@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>,
Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
Breno Leitao <leitao@...ian.org>,
Michael Neuling <mikey@...ling.org>,
Diana Craciun <diana.craciun@....com>,
Firoz Khan <firoz.khan@...aro.org>,
Hari Bathini <hbathini@...ux.ibm.com>,
Joel Stanley <joel@....id.au>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@...il.com>,
Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Allison Randal <allison@...utok.net>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
Andrew Donnellan <andrew.donnellan@....ibm.com>,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 5/7] powerpc/64: make buildable without CONFIG_COMPAT
Le 12/09/2019 à 20:26, Michal Suchánek a écrit :
> On Thu, 12 Sep 2019 20:02:16 +0200
> Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@....fr> wrote:
>
>> Le 12/09/2019 à 19:26, Michal Suchanek a écrit :
>>> There are numerous references to 32bit functions in generic and 64bit
>>> code so ifdef them out.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Michal Suchanek <msuchanek@...e.de>
>>> ---
>>> v2:
>>> - fix 32bit ifdef condition in signal.c
>>> - simplify the compat ifdef condition in vdso.c - 64bit is redundant
>>> - simplify the compat ifdef condition in callchain.c - 64bit is redundant
>>> v3:
>>> - use IS_ENABLED and maybe_unused where possible
>>> - do not ifdef declarations
>>> - clean up Makefile
>>> v4:
>>> - further makefile cleanup
>>> - simplify is_32bit_task conditions
>>> - avoid ifdef in condition by using return
>>> v5:
>>> - avoid unreachable code on 32bit
>>> - make is_current_64bit constant on !COMPAT
>>> - add stub perf_callchain_user_32 to avoid some ifdefs
>>> v6:
>>> - consolidate current_is_64bit
>>> v7:
>>> - remove leftover perf_callchain_user_32 stub from previous series version
>>> v8:
>>> - fix build again - too trigger-happy with stub removal
>>> - remove a vdso.c hunk that causes warning according to kbuild test robot
>>> ---
>>> arch/powerpc/include/asm/thread_info.h | 4 +--
>>> arch/powerpc/kernel/Makefile | 7 ++---
>>> arch/powerpc/kernel/entry_64.S | 2 ++
>>> arch/powerpc/kernel/signal.c | 3 +-
>>> arch/powerpc/kernel/syscall_64.c | 6 ++--
>>> arch/powerpc/kernel/vdso.c | 3 +-
>>> arch/powerpc/perf/callchain.c | 39 ++++++++++++++------------
>>> 7 files changed, 33 insertions(+), 31 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/thread_info.h b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/thread_info.h
>>> index 8e1d0195ac36..c128d8a48ea3 100644
>>> --- a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/thread_info.h
>>> +++ b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/thread_info.h
>>> @@ -144,10 +144,10 @@ static inline bool test_thread_local_flags(unsigned int flags)
>>> return (ti->local_flags & flags) != 0;
>>> }
>>>
>>> -#ifdef CONFIG_PPC64
>>> +#ifdef CONFIG_COMPAT
>>> #define is_32bit_task() (test_thread_flag(TIF_32BIT))
>>> #else
>>> -#define is_32bit_task() (1)
>>> +#define is_32bit_task() (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PPC32))
>>> #endif
>>>
>>> #if defined(CONFIG_PPC64)
>>
>> [...]
>>
>>> +static inline int current_is_64bit(void)
>>> +{
>>> + if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_COMPAT))
>>> + return IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PPC64);
>>> + /*
>>> + * We can't use test_thread_flag() here because we may be on an
>>> + * interrupt stack, and the thread flags don't get copied over
>>> + * from the thread_info on the main stack to the interrupt stack.
>>> + */
>>> + return !test_ti_thread_flag(task_thread_info(current), TIF_32BIT);
>>> +}
>>
>>
>> Since at least commit ed1cd6deb013 ("powerpc: Activate
>> CONFIG_THREAD_INFO_IN_TASK")
>> [https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=ed1cd6d]
>> the above comment is wrong and current_is_64bit() is equivalent to
>> !is_32bit_task()
>>
>> See https://github.com/linuxppc/issues/issues/275
>>
>> Christophe
>
> I aim at changing the code as little as possible here. A separate patch
> on top removing this function would be ok?
Yes I agree. By making prior to this patch a separate patch which drops
current_is_64bit() would be good. And it would reduce the size of this
patch by approximately one third.
Christophe
>
> Thanks
>
> Michal
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists