Hi
On Mon, Sep 1, 2014 at 7:16 PM, Pranith Kumar wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 1, 2014 at 11:31 AM, David Herrmann wrote:
>
>>
>> Btw., the original patch (wire up syscalls) can be applied unchanged.
>>
>
> Great! Can I use that as an Ack-by? I will send in the patch with
> updated changelog.
Sure, go a
On Mon, Sep 1, 2014 at 11:31 AM, David Herrmann wrote:
>
> Btw., the original patch (wire up syscalls) can be applied unchanged.
>
Great! Can I use that as an Ack-by? I will send in the patch with
updated changelog.
--
Pranith
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux
Hi
On Mon, Sep 1, 2014 at 5:21 PM, Pranith Kumar wrote:
> Hi David,
>
> On Mon, Sep 1, 2014 at 7:33 AM, David Herrmann wrote:
>>
>> Nice catch. We changed 'flags' from u64 to "unsigned int" in the last
>> revision of the series. Patch looks good, but I'd prefer using
>> "unsigned int" as type, i
Hi David,
On Mon, Sep 1, 2014 at 7:33 AM, David Herrmann wrote:
>
> Nice catch. We changed 'flags' from u64 to "unsigned int" in the last
> revision of the series. Patch looks good, but I'd prefer using
> "unsigned int" as type, instead of __u32. Just to be consistent with
> the syscall interface
Hi
On Sun, Aug 31, 2014 at 7:51 PM, Pranith Kumar wrote:
>
> On 08/31/2014 10:34 AM, David Herrmann wrote:
>> The only arch-dependent code for memfd_test.c is the syscall invocation:
>> memfd_create(const char *name, unsigned int flags);
>> via glibc as:
>> syscall(__NR_memfd_create, name
On 08/31/2014 10:34 AM, David Herrmann wrote:
> The only arch-dependent code for memfd_test.c is the syscall invocation:
> memfd_create(const char *name, unsigned int flags);
> via glibc as:
> syscall(__NR_memfd_create, name, flags);
>
> Can you debug your test-run (maybe via simple printk
Hi
On Sun, Aug 31, 2014 at 2:52 PM, Pranith Kumar wrote:
> Hi Geert,
>
> On Sun, Aug 31, 2014 at 4:53 AM, Geert Uytterhoeven
> wrote:
>> Hi Pranith,
>>
>> On Sat, Aug 30, 2014 at 5:36 AM, Pranith Kumar wrote:
>>> I see that the three syscalls seccomp, getrandom and memfd_create are not
>>> wir
Hi Pranith,
On Sun, Aug 31, 2014 at 2:52 PM, Pranith Kumar wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 31, 2014 at 4:53 AM, Geert Uytterhoeven
> wrote:
>> On Sat, Aug 30, 2014 at 5:36 AM, Pranith Kumar wrote:
>>> I see that the three syscalls seccomp, getrandom and memfd_create are not
>>> wired
>>> because of which
Hi Geert,
On Sun, Aug 31, 2014 at 4:53 AM, Geert Uytterhoeven
wrote:
> Hi Pranith,
>
> On Sat, Aug 30, 2014 at 5:36 AM, Pranith Kumar wrote:
>> I see that the three syscalls seccomp, getrandom and memfd_create are not
>> wired
>> because of which we get a warning while compilation.
>>
>> So I w
Hi Pranith,
On Sat, Aug 30, 2014 at 5:36 AM, Pranith Kumar wrote:
> I see that the three syscalls seccomp, getrandom and memfd_create are not
> wired
> because of which we get a warning while compilation.
>
> So I wired them up in this patch. What else needs to be done? I tried the
> memfd_test
10 matches
Mail list logo
