From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752098AbeENJ5g (ORCPT ); Mon, 14 May 2018 05:57:36 -0400 Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.101.70]:38644 "EHLO foss.arm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750917AbeENJ5e (ORCPT ); Mon, 14 May 2018 05:57:34 -0400 Date: Mon, 14 May 2018 10:57:30 +0100 From: Dave Martin To: Mark Rutland Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, marc.zyngier@arm.com, catalin.marinas@arm.com, will.deacon@arm.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux@dominikbrodowski.net, james.morse@arm.com, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/18] arm64: consistently use unsigned long for thread flags Message-ID: <20180514095722.GW7753@e103592.cambridge.arm.com> References: <20180514094640.27569-1-mark.rutland@arm.com> <20180514094640.27569-2-mark.rutland@arm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20180514094640.27569-2-mark.rutland@arm.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 10:46:23AM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote: > In do_notify_resume, we manipulate thread_flags as a 32-bit unsigned > int, whereas thread_info::flags is a 64-bit unsigned long, and elsewhere > (e.g. in the entry assembly) we manipulate the flags as a 64-bit > quantity. > > For consistency, and to avoid problems if we end up with more than 32 > flags, let's make do_notify_resume take the flags as a 64-bit unsigned > long. Looks sensible. Reviewed-by: Dave Martin > > Signed-off-by: Mark Rutland > Cc: Catalin Marinas > Cc: Will Deacon > --- > arch/arm64/kernel/signal.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/signal.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/signal.c > index 154b7d30145d..8e624fec4707 100644 > --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/signal.c > +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/signal.c > @@ -896,7 +896,7 @@ static void do_signal(struct pt_regs *regs) > } > > asmlinkage void do_notify_resume(struct pt_regs *regs, > - unsigned int thread_flags) > + unsigned long thread_flags) > { > /* > * The assembly code enters us with IRQs off, but it hasn't > -- > 2.11.0 > > > _______________________________________________ > linux-arm-kernel mailing list > linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org > http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Dave.Martin@arm.com (Dave Martin) Date: Mon, 14 May 2018 10:57:30 +0100 Subject: [PATCH 01/18] arm64: consistently use unsigned long for thread flags In-Reply-To: <20180514094640.27569-2-mark.rutland@arm.com> References: <20180514094640.27569-1-mark.rutland@arm.com> <20180514094640.27569-2-mark.rutland@arm.com> Message-ID: <20180514095722.GW7753@e103592.cambridge.arm.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 10:46:23AM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote: > In do_notify_resume, we manipulate thread_flags as a 32-bit unsigned > int, whereas thread_info::flags is a 64-bit unsigned long, and elsewhere > (e.g. in the entry assembly) we manipulate the flags as a 64-bit > quantity. > > For consistency, and to avoid problems if we end up with more than 32 > flags, let's make do_notify_resume take the flags as a 64-bit unsigned > long. Looks sensible. Reviewed-by: Dave Martin > > Signed-off-by: Mark Rutland > Cc: Catalin Marinas > Cc: Will Deacon > --- > arch/arm64/kernel/signal.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/signal.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/signal.c > index 154b7d30145d..8e624fec4707 100644 > --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/signal.c > +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/signal.c > @@ -896,7 +896,7 @@ static void do_signal(struct pt_regs *regs) > } > > asmlinkage void do_notify_resume(struct pt_regs *regs, > - unsigned int thread_flags) > + unsigned long thread_flags) > { > /* > * The assembly code enters us with IRQs off, but it hasn't > -- > 2.11.0 > > > _______________________________________________ > linux-arm-kernel mailing list > linux-arm-kernel at lists.infradead.org > http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel