Re: [PATCH 1/2] kselftests: mm: Fix wrong __NR_userfaultfd value

2024-09-23 Thread Muhammad Usama Anjum
On 9/23/24 9:02 PM, Shuah Khan wrote: > On 9/22/24 23:35, Muhammad Usama Anjum wrote: >> ... >> grep -rnIF "#define __NR_userfaultfd" tools/include/uapi/asm-generic/unistd.h:681:#define __NR_userfaultfd 282 arch/x86/include/generated/uapi/asm/unistd_32.h:374:#define __NR_us

Re: [PATCH 1/2] kselftests: mm: Fix wrong __NR_userfaultfd value

2024-09-23 Thread Shuah Khan
On 9/22/24 23:35, Muhammad Usama Anjum wrote: ... grep -rnIF "#define __NR_userfaultfd" tools/include/uapi/asm-generic/unistd.h:681:#define __NR_userfaultfd 282 arch/x86/include/generated/uapi/asm/unistd_32.h:374:#define __NR_userfaultfd 374 arch/x86/include/generated/uapi/asm/unistd_64.h:327:#

Re: [PATCH 1/2] kselftests: mm: Fix wrong __NR_userfaultfd value

2024-09-22 Thread Muhammad Usama Anjum
... >> grep -rnIF "#define __NR_userfaultfd" >> tools/include/uapi/asm-generic/unistd.h:681:#define __NR_userfaultfd 282 >> arch/x86/include/generated/uapi/asm/unistd_32.h:374:#define >> __NR_userfaultfd 374 >> arch/x86/include/generated/uapi/asm/unistd_64.h:327:#define >> __NR_userfaultfd 323 >>

Re: [PATCH 1/2] kselftests: mm: Fix wrong __NR_userfaultfd value

2024-09-20 Thread Shuah Khan
On 9/17/24 23:46, Muhammad Usama Anjum wrote: On 9/17/24 6:56 AM, Shuah Khan wrote: On 9/16/24 00:32, Muhammad Usama Anjum wrote: On 9/12/24 8:44 PM, Shuah Khan wrote: On 9/12/24 04:31, Muhammad Usama Anjum wrote: The value of __NR_userfaultfd was changed to 282 when asm-generic/unistd.h was

Re: [PATCH 1/2] kselftests: mm: Fix wrong __NR_userfaultfd value

2024-09-17 Thread Muhammad Usama Anjum
On 9/18/24 10:46 AM, Muhammad Usama Anjum wrote: > On 9/17/24 6:56 AM, Shuah Khan wrote: >> On 9/16/24 00:32, Muhammad Usama Anjum wrote: >>> On 9/12/24 8:44 PM, Shuah Khan wrote: On 9/12/24 04:31, Muhammad Usama Anjum wrote: > The value of __NR_userfaultfd was changed to 282 when > as

Re: [PATCH 1/2] kselftests: mm: Fix wrong __NR_userfaultfd value

2024-09-17 Thread Muhammad Usama Anjum
On 9/17/24 6:56 AM, Shuah Khan wrote: > On 9/16/24 00:32, Muhammad Usama Anjum wrote: >> On 9/12/24 8:44 PM, Shuah Khan wrote: >>> On 9/12/24 04:31, Muhammad Usama Anjum wrote: The value of __NR_userfaultfd was changed to 282 when asm-generic/unistd.h was included. It makes the test to fa

Re: [PATCH 1/2] kselftests: mm: Fix wrong __NR_userfaultfd value

2024-09-16 Thread Shuah Khan
On 9/16/24 00:32, Muhammad Usama Anjum wrote: On 9/12/24 8:44 PM, Shuah Khan wrote: On 9/12/24 04:31, Muhammad Usama Anjum wrote: The value of __NR_userfaultfd was changed to 282 when asm-generic/unistd.h was included. It makes the test to fail every time as the correct number of this syscall o

Re: [PATCH 1/2] kselftests: mm: Fix wrong __NR_userfaultfd value

2024-09-15 Thread Muhammad Usama Anjum
On 9/12/24 8:44 PM, Shuah Khan wrote: > On 9/12/24 04:31, Muhammad Usama Anjum wrote: >> The value of __NR_userfaultfd was changed to 282 when >> asm-generic/unistd.h was included. It makes the test to fail every time >> as the correct number of this syscall on x86_64 is 323. Fix the header >> to a

Re: [PATCH 1/2] kselftests: mm: Fix wrong __NR_userfaultfd value

2024-09-12 Thread Shuah Khan
On 9/12/24 04:31, Muhammad Usama Anjum wrote: The value of __NR_userfaultfd was changed to 282 when asm-generic/unistd.h was included. It makes the test to fail every time as the correct number of this syscall on x86_64 is 323. Fix the header to asm/unistd.h. "please elaborate every time" - I

[PATCH 1/2] kselftests: mm: Fix wrong __NR_userfaultfd value

2024-09-12 Thread Muhammad Usama Anjum
The value of __NR_userfaultfd was changed to 282 when asm-generic/unistd.h was included. It makes the test to fail every time as the correct number of this syscall on x86_64 is 323. Fix the header to asm/unistd.h. Fixes: a5c6bc590094 ("selftests/mm: remove local __NR_* definitions") Signed-off-by: