From: Muhammad Usama Anjum <Usama.Anjum@collabora.com>
To: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>,
David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>,
Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com>,
"Dr. David Alan Gilbert" <dgilbert@redhat.com>,
Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>,
Kim Phillips <kim.phillips@arm.com>
Cc: Usama.Anjum@collabora.com, kernel@collabora.com,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, John Hubbard <jhubbard@nvidia.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] kselftests: mm: Fix wrong __NR_userfaultfd value
Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2024 11:21:36 +0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <109a9f01-0c5c-49f3-b956-91bc789a1c44@collabora.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <db8b758e-9051-4ee0-b0e7-3b54eda0c71b@linuxfoundation.org>
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_userfaultfd 374
>>>> arch/x86/include/generated/uapi/asm/unistd_64.h:327:#define
>>>> __NR_userfaultfd 323
>>>> arch/x86/include/generated/uapi/asm/unistd_x32.h:282:#define
>>>> __NR_userfaultfd (__X32_SYSCALL_BIT + 323)
>>>> arch/arm/include/generated/uapi/asm/unistd-eabi.h:347:#define
>>>> __NR_userfaultfd (__NR_SYSCALL_BASE + 388)
>>>> arch/arm/include/generated/uapi/asm/unistd-oabi.h:359:#define
>>>> __NR_userfaultfd (__NR_SYSCALL_BASE + 388)
>>>> include/uapi/asm-generic/unistd.h:681:#define __NR_userfaultfd 282
>>>>
>>>> The number is dependent on the architecture. The above data shows that:
>>>> x86 374
>>>> x86_64 323
>>>
>>> Correct and the generated header files do the right thing and it is
>>> good to
>>> include them as this patch does.
>>>
>>> This is a good find and fix. I wish you explained this in your
>>> changelog.
>>> Please add more details when you send v2.
>> I'm sending v2
>>
>>>
>>> There could be other issues lurking based on what I found.
>>>
>>> The other two files are the problem where they hard code it to 282
>>> without
>>> taking the __NR_SYSCALL_BASE for the arch into consideration:
>>>
>>> tools/include/uapi/asm-generic/unistd.h:681:#define __NR_userfaultfd 282
>>> include/uapi/asm-generic/unistd.h:681:#define __NR_userfaultfd 282
>>>
>>>>
>>>> I'm unable to find the history of why it is set to 282 in unistd.h and
>>>> when this problem happened.
>>>
>>> According to git history it is added in the following commit to
>>> include/uapi/asm-generic/unistd.h:
>>>
>>> 09f7298100ea9767324298ab0c7979f6d7463183
>>> Subject: [PATCH] userfaultfd: register uapi generic syscall (aarch64)
>>>
>>> and it is added in the following commit to
>>> tools/include/uapi/asm-generic/unistd.h
>>> 34b009cfde2b8ce20a69c7bfd6bad4ce0e7cd970
>>> Subject: [PATCH] tools include: Grab copies of arm64 dependent unistd.h
>>> files
>>>
>>> I think, the above defines from include/uapi/asm-generic/unistd.h and
>>> tools/include/uapi/asm-generic/unistd.h should be removed.
>>>
>>> Maybe others familiar with userfaultfd can determine the best course of
>>> action.
>>> We might have other NR_ defines in these two files that are causing
>>> problems
>>> for tests and tools that we haven't uncovered yet.
>> Added authors of these patches.
>>
>
> Thank you. Would you be able top follow up on this and send patches
> to remove these defines if it deemed to be the correct solution?
Yeah, sure. I'll follow up and fix the issue.
>
> thanks,
> -- Shuah
>
>
--
BR,
Muhammad Usama Anjum
prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-09-24 6:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-09-12 10:31 Muhammad Usama Anjum
2024-09-12 10:31 ` [PATCH 2/2] kselftests: mm: Fail the test if userfaultfd syscall isn't found Muhammad Usama Anjum
2024-09-12 16:10 ` Shuah Khan
2024-09-12 17:28 ` Shuah Khan
2024-09-16 6:33 ` Muhammad Usama Anjum
2024-09-12 15:44 ` [PATCH 1/2] kselftests: mm: Fix wrong __NR_userfaultfd value Shuah Khan
2024-09-16 6:32 ` Muhammad Usama Anjum
2024-09-17 1:56 ` Shuah Khan
2024-09-18 5:46 ` Muhammad Usama Anjum
2024-09-18 5:46 ` Muhammad Usama Anjum
2024-09-20 14:59 ` Shuah Khan
2024-09-23 5:35 ` Muhammad Usama Anjum
2024-09-23 16:02 ` Shuah Khan
2024-09-24 6:21 ` Muhammad Usama Anjum [this message]
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=109a9f01-0c5c-49f3-b956-91bc789a1c44@collabora.com \
--to=usama.anjum@collabora.com \
--cc=aarcange@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=david@redhat.com \
--cc=dgilbert@redhat.com \
--cc=jhubbard@nvidia.com \
--cc=kernel@collabora.com \
--cc=kim.phillips@arm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=peterx@redhat.com \
--cc=shuah@kernel.org \
--cc=skhan@linuxfoundation.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
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