Re: [PATCH 09/18] arm64: introduce binfmt_elf32.c

2016-12-14 Thread Yury Norov
On Mon, Dec 05, 2016 at 03:10:19PM +, Catalin Marinas wrote: > On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 11:33:08PM +0300, Yury Norov wrote: > > As we support more than one compat formats, it looks more reasonable > > to not use fs/compat_binfmt.c. Custom binfmt_elf32.c allows to move aarch32 > > specific defini

Re: [PATCH v2] kasan: Support for r/w instrumentation control

2016-12-14 Thread Andrey Ryabinin
On 12/13/2016 11:58 AM, Dmitry Vyukov wrote: > --- a/Documentation/dev-tools/kasan.rst > +++ b/Documentation/dev-tools/kasan.rst > @@ -40,6 +40,14 @@ similar to the following to the respective kernel Makefile: > > KASAN_SANITIZE := n > > +Sometimes it may be useful to disable instrumentat

[PATCH] doc: Explain light-handed markup preference a bit better

2016-12-14 Thread Daniel Vetter
We already had a super-short blurb, but worth extending it I think: We're still pretty far away from anything like a consensus, but there's clearly a lot of people who prefer an as-light as possible approach to converting existing .txt files to .rst. Make sure this is properly taken into account an

Re: [RFC 03/10] kmod: add dynamic max concurrent thread count

2016-12-14 Thread Petr Mladek
On Thu 2016-12-08 11:48:14, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: > We currently statically limit the number of modprobe threads which > we allow to run concurrently to 50. As per Keith Owens, this was a > completely arbitrary value, and it was set in the 2.3.38 days [0] > over 16 years ago in year 2000. > > A

Re: [RFC 06/10] kmod: provide sanity check on kmod_concurrent access

2016-12-14 Thread Petr Mladek
On Thu 2016-12-08 11:48:50, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: > Only decrement *iff* we're possitive. Warn if we've hit > a situation where the counter is already 0 after we're done > with a modprobe call, this would tell us we have an unaccounted > counter access -- this in theory should not be possible as

Re: [PATCH 0/2] Add maintainers to the admin guide

2016-12-14 Thread Joe Perches
On Tue, 2016-12-13 at 07:38 -0200, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote: > Em Mon, 12 Dec 2016 12:56:50 -0800 > Joe Perches escreveu: > > Does the boxing with the === blocks align properly? > > It it really useful? Is there another/better way? > > Do you mean those? > > ===

Re: [RFC 07/10] kmod: use simplified rate limit printk

2016-12-14 Thread Petr Mladek
On Thu 2016-12-08 11:49:01, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: > Just use the simplified rate limit printk when the max modprobe > limit is reached, while at it throw out a bone should the error > be triggered. > > Signed-off-by: Luis R. Rodriguez > --- > kernel/kmod.c | 10 ++ > 1 file changed, 2

Re: [RFC 07/10] kmod: use simplified rate limit printk

2016-12-14 Thread Joe Perches
On Wed, 2016-12-14 at 17:23 +0100, Petr Mladek wrote: > On Thu 2016-12-08 11:49:01, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: > > Just use the simplified rate limit printk when the max modprobe > > limit is reached, while at it throw out a bone should the error > > be triggered. [] > > diff --git a/kernel/kmod.c b/

Re: [PATCH 0/2] Add maintainers to the admin guide

2016-12-14 Thread Mauro Carvalho Chehab
Em Wed, 14 Dec 2016 08:14:44 -0800 Joe Perches escreveu: > On Tue, 2016-12-13 at 07:38 -0200, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote: > > Em Mon, 12 Dec 2016 12:56:50 -0800 > > Joe Perches escreveu: > > > Does the boxing with the === blocks align properly? > > > It it really useful? Is there another

Re: [RFC 06/10] kmod: provide sanity check on kmod_concurrent access

2016-12-14 Thread Luis R. Rodriguez
On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 05:08:58PM +0100, Petr Mladek wrote: > On Thu 2016-12-08 11:48:50, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: > > Only decrement *iff* we're possitive. Warn if we've hit > > a situation where the counter is already 0 after we're done > > with a modprobe call, this would tell us we have an una

Re: [PATCH] Add +~800M crashkernel explaination

2016-12-14 Thread Robert LeBlanc
On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 8:08 PM, Xunlei Pang wrote: > On 12/10/2016 at 01:20 PM, Robert LeBlanc wrote: >> On Fri, Dec 9, 2016 at 7:49 PM, Baoquan He wrote: >>> On 12/09/16 at 05:22pm, Robert LeBlanc wrote: When trying to configure crashkernel greater than about 800 MB, the kernel fails

Re: [PATCH] Add +~800M crashkernel explaination

2016-12-14 Thread Xunlei Pang
On 12/15/2016 at 01:50 AM, Robert LeBlanc wrote: > On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 8:08 PM, Xunlei Pang wrote: >> On 12/10/2016 at 01:20 PM, Robert LeBlanc wrote: >>> On Fri, Dec 9, 2016 at 7:49 PM, Baoquan He wrote: On 12/09/16 at 05:22pm, Robert LeBlanc wrote: > When trying to configure crashk

Re: [RFC 10/10] kmod: add a sanity check on module loading

2016-12-14 Thread Rusty Russell
"Luis R. Rodriguez" writes: > kmod has an optimization in place whereby if a some kernel code > uses request_module() on a module already loaded we never bother > userspace as the module already is loaded. This is not true for > get_fs_type() though as it uses aliases. Well, the obvious thing to

[PATCH 6/8] Documentation/sparse: drop __CHECK_ENDIAN__

2016-12-14 Thread Michael S. Tsirkin
It's no longer used. Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin --- Documentation/translations/zh_CN/sparse.txt | 7 +-- Documentation/dev-tools/sparse.rst | 7 +-- 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-) diff --git a/Documentation/translations/zh_CN/sparse.txt b/Documentatio

[PATCH 3/8] Documentation/sparse: drop __bitwise__

2016-12-14 Thread Michael S. Tsirkin
We dropped __CHECK_ENDIAN__ so __bitwise__ is now an implementation detail. People should use __bitwise everywhere. Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin --- Documentation/dev-tools/sparse.rst | 7 --- 1 file changed, 7 deletions(-) diff --git a/Documentation/dev-tools/sparse.rst b/Documentati