From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S1752986AbdLNUiS (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Thu, 14 Dec 2017 15:38:18 -0500
Received: from atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz ([195.113.26.193]:56142 "EHLO
        atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S1752204AbdLNUiQ (ORCPT
        <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Thu, 14 Dec 2017 15:38:16 -0500
Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2017 21:38:15 +0100
From: Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>
To: Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
        Andrew Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>, Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@intel.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Jarkko Nikula <jarkko.nikula@linux.intel.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix resume on x86-32 machines
Message-ID: <20171214203815.GA29972@amd>
References: <2809506.pL8kVbvXcY@aspire.rjw.lan>
 <20171210213804.GA4660@amd>
 <76028A95-1CE1-49AA-9929-9C15FFC520EB@amacapital.net>
 <151331264.Sjvx2oHGGq@aspire.rjw.lan>
 <CA+55aFwPW3z6S_Sfm_2o1+HUYhhPViJ0zCWvZza=K5G0=wtYxw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CALCETrX33FT_G_LPLmMkr_ifPEATToZ2=2pjyOj74o1-__-O-g@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1;
        protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="9amGYk9869ThD9tj"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CALCETrX33FT_G_LPLmMkr_ifPEATToZ2=2pjyOj74o1-__-O-g@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org


--9amGYk9869ThD9tj
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hi!

> > But yes, Rafael's patch looks like the minimal one-liner. But I think
> > we should do the %gs load early too for the 32-bit stack canary case,
> > kind of like we need to do %fs for percpu base.
>=20
> I'll try to get to this in a day or so -- is that okay?  Or should we
> do some trivial fix/revert and fix it for real next time around?

I can test the patch....

But given this is already "regression fix for x86-64 caused regression
on x86-32", I really believe we should merge trivial fix now, and do
the cleanups / nicer fixes sometime later?

Thanks,
								Pavel

--=20
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blo=
g.html

--9amGYk9869ThD9tj
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: Digital signature

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1

iEYEARECAAYFAloy4TcACgkQMOfwapXb+vJMtACfeKTW2mqESE4zYyDB435Awh0R
624AnjcsZ71kvDicgWpy7jbaSuRC0hov
=al7L
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--9amGYk9869ThD9tj--