linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
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>
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: Wed, 18 Sep 2024 10:46:47 +0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <b1338345-42a5-4695-a033-c0de1c203594@collabora.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <0b847784-a95f-4ed5-a0fb-1b7b4023df13@collabora.com>

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
>>>>> 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 just built on my x86_64 and built
>>>> just fine.
>>> The build isn't broken.
>>>
>>>> I am not saying this isn't a problem, it is good to
>>>> understand why and how it is failing before making the change.
>>> I mean to say that the test is failing at run time because the correct
>>> userfaultfd syscall isn't being found with __NR_userfaultfd = 282.
>>> _NR_userfaultfd's value depends on the header. When asm-generic/unistd.h
>>> is included, its value (282) is wrong. I've tested on x86_64.
>>>
>>
>> Okay - how do you know this is wrong? can you provide more details.
>>
>> git grep _NR_userfaultfd
>> include/uapi/asm-generic/unistd.h:#define __NR_userfaultfd 282
>> include/uapi/asm-generic/unistd.h:__SYSCALL(__NR_userfaultfd,
>> sys_userfaultfd)
>> tools/include/uapi/asm-generic/unistd.h:#define __NR_userfaultfd 282
>>
>>> The fix is simple. Add the correct header which has _NR_userfaultfd =
>>> 323.
> 
> 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
> 
> I'm unable to find the history of why it is set to 282 in unistd.h and
> when this problem happened.
Does anybody has understanding of this?

> 
>>
>> I need more details on this number.
>>
>> thanks,
>> -- Shuah
> 

-- 
BR,
Muhammad Usama Anjum



  reply	other threads:[~2024-09-18  5:47 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 [this message]
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

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=b1338345-42a5-4695-a033-c0de1c203594@collabora.com \
    --to=usama.anjum@collabora.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=david@redhat.com \
    --cc=jhubbard@nvidia.com \
    --cc=kernel@collabora.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