From: antoine <an...@na...> - 2005-07-08 10:30:14
|
> Ok, it's there. I've simply adapted the two SKAS0 patches for 2.6.12=20 > (backporting a cleanup and fixing some trivial rejects). More info at t= he web=20 > page. >=20 > Testing is welcome. In particular, any regression in SKAS3 mode should = be=20 > prompty reported to me and Jeff, because they are not expected at all. >=20 > I'll add a simplified "proc_mm=3D0" switch (it's not the Bodo's patch b= ecause=20 > that is more intrusive and splits that further into proc_mm and faultin= fo=20 > switches). Don't know if you're interested in this report but it does not build for x86_64: SYMLINK arch/um/sys-x86_64/semaphore.c CC arch/um/sys-x86_64/semaphore.o CC arch/um/sys-x86_64/sigcontext.o CC arch/um/sys-x86_64/signal.o arch/um/sys-x86_64/signal.c: In function =A1setup_signal_stack_si=A2: arch/um/sys-x86_64/signal.c:171: error: invalid lvalue in assignment make[1]: *** [arch/um/sys-x86_64/signal.o] Error 1 make: *** [arch/um/sys-x86_64] Error 2 Could you include the pcap patch in bb? Thanks Antoine |
From: Blaisorblade <bla...@ya...> - 2005-07-09 10:34:13
Attachments:
uml-fix-for-gcc4-lvalue.patch
|
On Friday 08 July 2005 12:29, antoine wrote: > > Ok, it's there. I've simply adapted the two SKAS0 patches for 2.6.12 > > (backporting a cleanup and fixing some trivial rejects). More info at t= he > > web page. > > > > Testing is welcome. In particular, any regression in SKAS3 mode should = be > > prompty reported to me and Jeff, because they are not expected at all. > > > > I'll add a simplified "proc_mm=3D0" switch (it's not the Bodo's patch > > because that is more intrusive and splits that further into proc_mm and > > faultinfo switches). > Don't know if you're interested in this report but it does not build for > x86_64: > SYMLINK arch/um/sys-x86_64/semaphore.c > CC arch/um/sys-x86_64/semaphore.o > CC arch/um/sys-x86_64/sigcontext.o > CC arch/um/sys-x86_64/signal.o > arch/um/sys-x86_64/signal.c: In function =A1setup_signal_stack_si=A2: > arch/um/sys-x86_64/signal.c:171: error: invalid lvalue in assignment > make[1]: *** [arch/um/sys-x86_64/signal.o] Error 1 > make: *** [arch/um/sys-x86_64] Error 2 I remember this report, only I just suggested the fix and didn't post it (w= as=20 busy at that time). It's SKAS0 - unrelated I think (I may be wrong, but the= =20 whole patchset does not include it) but triggered by GCC4. > Could you include the pcap patch in bb? Yes, I'll do. > Thanks > Antoine =2D-=20 Inform me of my mistakes, so I can keep imitating Homer Simpson's "Doh!". Paolo Giarrusso, aka Blaisorblade (Skype ID "PaoloGiarrusso", ICQ 215621894) http://www.user-mode-linux.org/~blaisorblade |
From: Blaisorblade <bla...@ya...> - 2005-07-11 21:39:10
Attachments:
uml-fix-for-gcc4-lvalue.patch
|
On Saturday 09 July 2005 12:40, Blaisorblade wrote: > On Friday 08 July 2005 12:29, antoine wrote: > > > > Don't know if you're interested in this report but it does not build for > > x86_64: > > SYMLINK arch/um/sys-x86_64/semaphore.c > > CC arch/um/sys-x86_64/semaphore.o > > CC arch/um/sys-x86_64/sigcontext.o > > CC arch/um/sys-x86_64/signal.o > > arch/um/sys-x86_64/signal.c: In function =E2=80=98setup_signal_stack_si= =E2=80=99: > > arch/um/sys-x86_64/signal.c:171: error: invalid lvalue in assignment > > make[1]: *** [arch/um/sys-x86_64/signal.o] Error 1 > > make: *** [arch/um/sys-x86_64] Error 2 > > I remember this report, only I just suggested the fix and didn't post it > (was busy at that time). It's SKAS0 - unrelated I think (I may be wrong, > but the whole patchset does not include it) but triggered by GCC4. Please keep remembering I *am* stupid, as just noted by Russell King (ARM=20 maintainer) :-(. The attached patch makes more sense... however it seems that the affected c= ode=20 is anyway buggy, so I hope Jeff will help fixing this (unless I get to=20 understand this magically). =2D-=20 Inform me of my mistakes, so I can keep imitating Homer Simpson's "Doh!". Paolo Giarrusso, aka Blaisorblade (Skype ID "PaoloGiarrusso", ICQ 215621894) http://www.user-mode-linux.org/~blaisorblade |
From: Blaisorblade <bla...@ya...> - 2005-07-11 21:57:30
|
On Monday 11 July 2005 23:46, Blaisorblade wrote: > On Saturday 09 July 2005 12:40, Blaisorblade wrote: > > On Friday 08 July 2005 12:29, antoine wrote: > > > Don't know if you're interested in this report but it does not build > > > for x86_64: > > > SYMLINK arch/um/sys-x86_64/semaphore.c > > > CC arch/um/sys-x86_64/semaphore.o > > > CC arch/um/sys-x86_64/sigcontext.o > > > CC arch/um/sys-x86_64/signal.o > > > arch/um/sys-x86_64/signal.c: In function =E2=80=98setup_signal_stack_= si=E2=80=99: > > > arch/um/sys-x86_64/signal.c:171: error: invalid lvalue in assignment > > > make[1]: *** [arch/um/sys-x86_64/signal.o] Error 1 > > > make: *** [arch/um/sys-x86_64] Error 2 > > > > I remember this report, only I just suggested the fix and didn't post it > > (was busy at that time). It's SKAS0 - unrelated I think (I may be wrong, > > but the whole patchset does not include it) but triggered by GCC4. > > Please keep remembering I *am* stupid, as just noted by Russell King (ARM > maintainer) :-(. > > The attached patch makes more sense... however it seems that the affected > code is anyway buggy, so I hope Jeff will help fixing this (unless I get = to > understand this magically). Correction: the affected should be improved, but it anyway works. =2D-=20 Inform me of my mistakes, so I can keep imitating Homer Simpson's "Doh!". Paolo Giarrusso, aka Blaisorblade (Skype ID "PaoloGiarrusso", ICQ 215621894) http://www.user-mode-linux.org/~blaisorblade ___________________________________ Yahoo! Messenger: chiamate gratuite in tutto il mondo http://it.beta.messenger.yahoo.com |