ARM: kprobes: big-endian support
Hi Russell,
Please pull fixes for ARM Kprobes big-endian support.
It is reworked initial Ben's series for big endian support [1]. Dropped patches that are not directly related to kprobes. Current set of patches is enough to have functional BE kprobes.
One ARM kprobe test fails on Cortex-A15 boards (TC2 and Keystone2 EVM), while it passes on Pandaboard. The issue is not related to this series and already present in v3.13-rc7.
[1] http://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg285210.html
Signature · 34 lines
Taras Kondratiuk
--->8
The following changes since commit 7e22e91102c6b9df7c4ae2168910e19d2bb14cd6:
Linux 3.13-rc8 (2014-01-12 17:04:18 +0700)
are available in the git repository at:
git://git.linaro.org/people/taras.kondratiuk/linux.git tags/for_russell/arm-be-kprobes
for you to fetch changes up to 1c2d814c019b63bf0778fc2d2fd54c6e44f1ab5d:
ARM: kprobes-test: Workaround GAS .align bug (2014-01-13 13:58:52 +0200)
----------------------------------------------------------------
Ben Dooks (4):
ARM: kprobes: fix instruction fetch order with <asm/opcodes.h>
ARM: kprobes-test: use <asm/opcodes.h> for instruction accesses
ARM: kprobes-test: use <asm/opcodes.h> for ARM instruction building
ARM: kprobes-test: use <asm/opcodes.h> for Thumb instruction building
Taras Kondratiuk (1):
ARM: kprobes-test: Workaround GAS .align bug
arch/arm/kernel/kprobes-common.c | 19 +-
arch/arm/kernel/kprobes-test-arm.c | 603 +++++++++++++++++-----------------
arch/arm/kernel/kprobes-test-thumb.c | 447 ++++++++++++-------------
arch/arm/kernel/kprobes-test.c | 13 +-
arch/arm/kernel/kprobes-test.h | 2 +-
arch/arm/kernel/kprobes-thumb.c | 20 +-
arch/arm/kernel/kprobes.c | 9 +-
7 files changed, 562 insertions(+), 551 deletions(-)Quoted 8 lines · Taras Kondratiuk
Hi Russell,
Please pull fixes for ARM Kprobes big-endian support.
It is reworked initial Ben's series for big endian support [1]. Dropped patches that are not directly related to kprobes. Current set of patches is enough to have functional BE kprobes.
Quoted 6 lines
One ARM kprobe test fails on Cortex-A15 boards (TC2 and Keystone2 EVM), while it passes on Pandaboard. The issue is not related to this series and already present in v3.13-rc7.
Hi Russell,
This pull request is based on 3.13-rc8, but it applies cleanly to 3.14-rc3, because kprobes are not touched since then. Do I need to resent a new pull request based on 3.14-rc3 anyway?
Signature · 1 line
Taras Kondratiuk
Quoted 13 lines · Taras Kondratiuk
Quoted 12 lines · Taras Kondratiuk
Hi Russell,
Please pull fixes for ARM Kprobes big-endian support.
It is reworked initial Ben's series for big endian support [1]. Dropped patches that are not directly related to kprobes. Current set of patches is enough to have functional BE kprobes.
One ARM kprobe test fails on Cortex-A15 boards (TC2 and Keystone2 EVM), while it passes on Pandaboard. The issue is not related to this series and already present in v3.13-rc7.
Quoted 9 lines
Quoted 2 lines
Hi Russell,
This pull request is based on 3.13-rc8, but it applies cleanly to 3.14-rc3, because kprobes are not touched since then. Do I need to resent a new pull request based on 3.14-rc3 anyway?
Hi Russell,
Is there any issue with this pull request?
Should I do something to get it pulled?
Signature · 1 line
Taras Kondratiuk
Quoted 24 lines · Taras Kondratiuk
Quoted 13 lines · Taras Kondratiuk
Quoted 12 lines · Taras Kondratiuk
Hi Russell,
Please pull fixes for ARM Kprobes big-endian support.
It is reworked initial Ben's series for big endian support [1]. Dropped patches that are not directly related to kprobes. Current set of patches is enough to have functional BE kprobes.
One ARM kprobe test fails on Cortex-A15 boards (TC2 and Keystone2 EVM), while it passes on Pandaboard. The issue is not related to this series and already present in v3.13-rc7.
Quoted 9 lines
Quoted 2 lines
Hi Russell,
This pull request is based on 3.13-rc8, but it applies cleanly to 3.14-rc3, because kprobes are not touched since then. Do I need to resent a new pull request based on 3.14-rc3 anyway?
Quoted 4 lines
Hi Russell,
Is there any issue with this pull request?
Should I do something to get it pulled?
There's nothing wrong, apart from me being far too busy hacking on really crap code to care about reading much email - which means that lots of email simply just gets buried and lost.
There is now a problem with this pull - it conflicts very badly with Dave Long's uprobes code, which I've already pulled, so much so that I'm not happy to do the conflict resolution since I know nothing about this code, and it's a feature I don't make any use of.
I notice that Dave Long and yourself are both under the Linaro umbrella, but there seems to be no coordination between yourselves, despite working on the same code...
Signature · 2 lines
FTTC broadband for 0.8mile line: now at 9.7Mbps down 460kbps up... slowly improving, and getting towards what was expected from it.
Quoted 8 lines · Russell King - ARM Linux
Quoted 6 lines · Taras Kondratiuk
On 02/20/2014 12:59 AM, Taras Kondratiuk wrote:
Hi Russell,
Is there any issue with this pull request?
Should I do something to get it pulled?
Quoted 8 lines
There's nothing wrong, apart from me being far too busy hacking on really crap code to care about reading much email - which means that lots of email simply just gets buried and lost.
There is now a problem with this pull - it conflicts very badly with Dave Long's uprobes code, which I've already pulled, so much so that I'm not happy to do the conflict resolution since I know nothing about this code, and it's a feature I don't make any use of.
I've rebased it onto your for-next branch. Kprobes are functional in LE and BE. I'll send an updated pull request after verifying uprobes.
Quoted 3 lines
I notice that Dave Long and yourself are both under the Linaro umbrella, but there seems to be no coordination between yourselves, despite working on the same code...
Yeah, we are working in different teams and unfortunately haven't coordinated an upstreaming sequence.
Signature · 1 line
Taras Kondratiuk
Quoted 13 lines · Taras Kondratiuk
Quoted 12 lines · Russell King - ARM Linux
Quoted 6 lines · Taras Kondratiuk
On 02/20/2014 12:59 AM, Taras Kondratiuk wrote:
Hi Russell,
Is there any issue with this pull request?
Should I do something to get it pulled?There's nothing wrong, apart from me being far too busy hacking on really crap code to care about reading much email - which means that lots of email simply just gets buried and lost.
Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 4 lines
There is now a problem with this pull - it conflicts very badly with Dave Long's uprobes code, which I've already pulled, so much so that I'm not happy to do the conflict resolution since I know nothing about this code, and it's a feature I don't make any use of.
I've rebased it onto your for-next branch. Kprobes are functional in LE and BE. I'll send an updated pull request after verifying uprobes.
That's not going to work. for-next is an unstable branch - all the merge commits there get regenerated on a fairly regular basis.
A better solution would be to base your patches on top of Dave Long's changes, which can be found at
git://git.linaro.org/people/dave.long/linux uprobes-v7
and should have an ID of c7edc9e326d5.
Signature · 2 lines
FTTC broadband for 0.8mile line: now at 9.7Mbps down 460kbps up... slowly improving, and getting towards what was expected from it.
Quoted 25 lines · Russell King - ARM Linux
Quoted 13 lines · Taras Kondratiuk
Quoted 12 lines · Russell King - ARM Linux
Quoted 6 lines · Taras Kondratiuk
On 02/20/2014 12:59 AM, Taras Kondratiuk wrote:
Hi Russell,
Is there any issue with this pull request?
Should I do something to get it pulled?There's nothing wrong, apart from me being far too busy hacking on really crap code to care about reading much email - which means that lots of email simply just gets buried and lost.
Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 4 lines
There is now a problem with this pull - it conflicts very badly with Dave Long's uprobes code, which I've already pulled, so much so that I'm not happy to do the conflict resolution since I know nothing about this code, and it's a feature I don't make any use of.
I've rebased it onto your for-next branch. Kprobes are functional in LE and BE. I'll send an updated pull request after verifying uprobes.
That's not going to work. for-next is an unstable branch - all the merge commits there get regenerated on a fairly regular basis.
Quoted 6 lines
A better solution would be to base your patches on top of Dave Long's changes, which can be found at
git://git.linaro.org/people/dave.long/linuxuprobes-v7and should have an ID of
c7edc9e326d5.
Ok I'll base on Dave's branch.
Signature · 1 line
Taras Kondratiuk