From: Nathan_Lynch@mentor•com (Nathan Lynch)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists•infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH v3] arm64, ia64, ppc, s390, sh, tile, um, x86, mm: Remove default gate area
Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2014 12:28:18 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <53C95932.206@mentor.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CALCETrXve-=N5yzqDw2YQee4BmC6sb8GYWYJcV2780V38OuJiQ@mail.gmail.com>
On 07/18/2014 11:53 AM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>
> On Jul 18, 2014 3:20 AM, "Richard Weinberger" <richard@nod•at
> <mailto:richard@nod•at>> wrote:
>>
>> Am 18.07.2014 12:14, schrieb Will Deacon:
>> > On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 03:47:26PM +0100, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>> >> On Sun, Jul 13, 2014 at 1:01 PM, Andy Lutomirski
> <luto at amacapital.net <mailto:luto@amacapital•net>> wrote:
>> >>> The core mm code will provide a default gate area based on
>> >>> FIXADDR_USER_START and FIXADDR_USER_END if
>> >>> !defined(__HAVE_ARCH_GATE_AREA) && defined(AT_SYSINFO_EHDR).
>> >>>
>> >>> This default is only useful for ia64. arm64, ppc, s390, sh, tile,
>> >>> 64-bit UML, and x86_32 have their own code just to disable it. arm,
>> >>> 32-bit UML, and x86_64 have gate areas, but they have their own
>> >>> implementations.
>> >>>
>> >>> This gets rid of the default and moves the code into ia64.
>> >>>
>> >>> This should save some code on architectures without a gate area: it's
>> >>> now possible to inline the gate_area functions in the default case.
>> >>
>> >> Can one of you pull this somewhere? Otherwise I can put it somewhere
>> >> stable and ask for -next inclusion, but that seems like overkill for a
>> >> single patch.
>>
>> For the um bits:
>> Acked-by: Richard Weinberger <richard at nod.at <mailto:richard@nod•at>>
>>
>> > I'd be happy to take the arm64 part, but it doesn't feel right for mm/*
>> > changes (or changes to other archs) to go via our tree.
>> >
>> > I'm not sure what the best approach is if you want to send this via
> a single
>> > tree. Maybe you could ask akpm nicely?
>>
>> Going though Andrew's tree sounds sane to me.
>
> Splitting this will be annoying: I'd probably have to add a flag asking
> for the new behavior, update all the arches, then remove the flag. The
> chance of screwing up bisectability in the process seems pretty high.
> This seems like overkill for a patch that mostly deletes code.
>
> Akpm, can you take this?
FWIW:
Acked-by: Nathan Lynch <nathan_lynch@mentor•com>
This patch allows me to avoid adding a bunch of empty hooks to arch/arm
when adding VDSO support:
http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2014-June/268045.html
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-07-18 17:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-07-13 20:01 [PATCH v3] arm64, ia64, ppc, s390, sh, tile, um, x86, mm: Remove default gate area Andy Lutomirski
2014-07-15 14:47 ` Andy Lutomirski
2014-07-18 10:14 ` Will Deacon
2014-07-18 10:20 ` Richard Weinberger
[not found] ` <CALCETrXve-=N5yzqDw2YQee4BmC6sb8GYWYJcV2780V38OuJiQ@mail.gmail.com>
2014-07-18 17:28 ` Nathan Lynch [this message]
2014-07-18 18:36 ` H. Peter Anvin
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=53C95932.206@mentor.com \
--to=nathan_lynch@mentor$(echo .)com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists$(echo .)infradead.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox