Hi Greg,
Today's linux-next merge of the m68knommu tree got a conflict in
arch/m68k/include/asm/ptrace.h between commit
63c361b65f6540043c4baabf1a044a45c7465858 ("m68k: use generic code for
ptrace requests") from the m68k tree and commit
03a03164e8084b810e9f92906a51232d63bac72c ("m68knommu: define
arch_has_single_step() and friends") from the m68knommu tree.
These mostly add the same stuff but not quite :-(
I have done a fixup (see below) and can carry it as necessary. Please
check the result.
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell [email protected]
diff --cc arch/m68k/include/asm/ptrace.h
index eef9309,beb2091..0000000
--- a/arch/m68k/include/asm/ptrace.h
+++ b/arch/m68k/include/asm/ptrace.h
@@@ -86,14 -84,15 +86,18 @@@ struct switch_stack
extern void show_regs(struct pt_regs *);
/*
- * These are defined as per linux/ptrace.h.
+ * These are defined as per linux/ptrace.h, which see.
*/
+ struct task_struct;
+
-#ifndef CONFIG_MMU
-#define arch_has_single_step() (1)
+#define arch_has_single_step() (1)
extern void user_enable_single_step(struct task_struct *);
extern void user_disable_single_step(struct task_struct *);
+
++#ifdef CONFIG_MMU
+#define arch_has_block_step() (1)
+extern void user_enable_block_step(struct task_struct *);
+ #endif
#endif /* __KERNEL__ */
#endif /* __ASSEMBLY__ */
On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 01:58, Stephen Rothwell <[email protected]> wrote:
> Today's linux-next merge of the m68knommu tree got a conflict in
> arch/m68k/include/asm/ptrace.h between commit
> 63c361b65f6540043c4baabf1a044a45c7465858 ("m68k: use generic code for
> ptrace requests") from the m68k tree and commit
> 03a03164e8084b810e9f92906a51232d63bac72c ("m68knommu: define
> arch_has_single_step() and friends") from the m68knommu tree.
>
> These mostly add the same stuff but not quite :-(
Ah sorry, my bad. I'm not yet used to the uClinux guys touching "my"
includes ;-)
So we need better coordination between us.
IIRC, Greg's changes were inspired by Andreas' patch.
> I have done a fixup (see below) and can carry it as necessary. Please
> check the result.
At first sight, it looks OK. Thanks for fixing it up!
> --
> Cheers,
> Stephen Rothwell [email protected]
>
> diff --cc arch/m68k/include/asm/ptrace.h
> index eef9309,beb2091..0000000
> --- a/arch/m68k/include/asm/ptrace.h
> +++ b/arch/m68k/include/asm/ptrace.h
> @@@ -86,14 -84,15 +86,18 @@@ struct switch_stack
> extern void show_regs(struct pt_regs *);
>
> /*
> - * These are defined as per linux/ptrace.h.
> + * These are defined as per linux/ptrace.h, which see.
> */
> + struct task_struct;
> +
> -#ifndef CONFIG_MMU
> -#define arch_has_single_step() (1)
> +#define arch_has_single_step() (1)
> extern void user_enable_single_step(struct task_struct *);
> extern void user_disable_single_step(struct task_struct *);
> +
> ++#ifdef CONFIG_MMU
> +#define arch_has_block_step() (1)
> +extern void user_enable_block_step(struct task_struct *);
> + #endif
>
> #endif /* __KERNEL__ */
> #endif /* __ASSEMBLY__ */
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- [email protected]
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds
Hi Stephen, Geert,
Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 01:58, Stephen Rothwell <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Today's linux-next merge of the m68knommu tree got a conflict in
>> arch/m68k/include/asm/ptrace.h between commit
>> 63c361b65f6540043c4baabf1a044a45c7465858 ("m68k: use generic code for
>> ptrace requests") from the m68k tree and commit
>> 03a03164e8084b810e9f92906a51232d63bac72c ("m68knommu: define
>> arch_has_single_step() and friends") from the m68knommu tree.
>>
>> These mostly add the same stuff but not quite :-(
>
> Ah sorry, my bad. I'm not yet used to the uClinux guys touching "my"
> includes ;-)
> So we need better coordination between us.
>
> IIRC, Greg's changes were inspired by Andreas' patch.
Yes, largely they are.
>> I have done a fixup (see below) and can carry it as necessary. Please
>> check the result.
>
> At first sight, it looks OK. Thanks for fixing it up!
Yep, looks ok from what I can see.
Geert, how do you want to handle for the real linus merge?
Do you want me to drop the changes to ptrace.h from that patch?
Regards
Greg
>> --
>> Cheers,
>> Stephen Rothwell [email protected]
>>
>> diff --cc arch/m68k/include/asm/ptrace.h
>> index eef9309,beb2091..0000000
>> --- a/arch/m68k/include/asm/ptrace.h
>> +++ b/arch/m68k/include/asm/ptrace.h
>> @@@ -86,14 -84,15 +86,18 @@@ struct switch_stack
>> extern void show_regs(struct pt_regs *);
>>
>> /*
>> - * These are defined as per linux/ptrace.h.
>> + * These are defined as per linux/ptrace.h, which see.
>> */
>> + struct task_struct;
>> +
>> -#ifndef CONFIG_MMU
>> -#define arch_has_single_step() (1)
>> +#define arch_has_single_step() (1)
>> extern void user_enable_single_step(struct task_struct *);
>> extern void user_disable_single_step(struct task_struct *);
>> +
>> ++#ifdef CONFIG_MMU
>> +#define arch_has_block_step() (1)
>> +extern void user_enable_block_step(struct task_struct *);
>> + #endif
>>
>> #endif /* __KERNEL__ */
>> #endif /* __ASSEMBLY__ */
>
> Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
>
> Geert
>
> --
> Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- [email protected]
>
> In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
> when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
> -- Linus Torvalds
>
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Greg Ungerer -- Principal Engineer EMAIL: [email protected]
SnapGear Group, McAfee PHONE: +61 7 3435 2888
8 Gardner Close FAX: +61 7 3217 5323
Milton, QLD, 4064, Australia WEB: http://www.SnapGear.com
On Fri, Nov 27, 2009 at 05:43, Greg Ungerer <[email protected]> wrote:
> Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 01:58, Stephen Rothwell <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Today's linux-next merge of the m68knommu tree got a conflict in
>>> arch/m68k/include/asm/ptrace.h between commit
>>> 63c361b65f6540043c4baabf1a044a45c7465858 ("m68k: use generic code for
>>> ptrace requests") from the m68k tree and commit
>>> 03a03164e8084b810e9f92906a51232d63bac72c ("m68knommu: define
>>> arch_has_single_step() and friends") from the m68knommu tree.
>>>
>>> These mostly add the same stuff but not quite :-(
>>
>> Ah sorry, my bad. I'm not yet used to the uClinux guys touching "my"
>> includes ;-)
>> So we need better coordination between us.
>>
>> IIRC, Greg's changes were inspired by Andreas' patch.
>
> Yes, largely they are.
>
>
>>> I have done a fixup (see below) and can carry it as necessary. Please
>>> check the result.
>>
>> At first sight, it looks OK. Thanks for fixing it up!
>
> Yep, looks ok from what I can see.
>
> Geert, how do you want to handle for the real linus merge?
> Do you want me to drop the changes to ptrace.h from that patch?
I can apply your patch (modified to apply on top of Andreas') to the
m68k for-linus branch.
Does that sound OK for you?
>>> --
>>> Cheers,
>>> Stephen Rothwell [email protected]
>>>
>>> diff --cc arch/m68k/include/asm/ptrace.h
>>> index eef9309,beb2091..0000000
>>> --- a/arch/m68k/include/asm/ptrace.h
>>> +++ b/arch/m68k/include/asm/ptrace.h
>>> @@@ -86,14 -84,15 +86,18 @@@ struct switch_stack
>>> extern void show_regs(struct pt_regs *);
>>>
>>> /*
>>> - * These are defined as per linux/ptrace.h.
>>> + * These are defined as per linux/ptrace.h, which see.
>>> */
>>> + struct task_struct;
>>> +
>>> -#ifndef CONFIG_MMU
>>> -#define arch_has_single_step() (1)
>>> +#define arch_has_single_step() (1)
>>> extern void user_enable_single_step(struct task_struct *);
>>> extern void user_disable_single_step(struct task_struct *);
>>> +
>>> ++#ifdef CONFIG_MMU
>>> +#define arch_has_block_step() (1)
>>> +extern void user_enable_block_step(struct task_struct *);
>>> + #endif
>>>
>>> #endif /* __KERNEL__ */
>>> #endif /* __ASSEMBLY__ */
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- [email protected]
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds
Hi Geert,
On 11/27/2009 06:43 PM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 27, 2009 at 05:43, Greg Ungerer<[email protected]> wrote:
>> Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
>>>
>>> On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 01:58, Stephen Rothwell<[email protected]>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Today's linux-next merge of the m68knommu tree got a conflict in
>>>> arch/m68k/include/asm/ptrace.h between commit
>>>> 63c361b65f6540043c4baabf1a044a45c7465858 ("m68k: use generic code for
>>>> ptrace requests") from the m68k tree and commit
>>>> 03a03164e8084b810e9f92906a51232d63bac72c ("m68knommu: define
>>>> arch_has_single_step() and friends") from the m68knommu tree.
>>>>
>>>> These mostly add the same stuff but not quite :-(
>>>
>>> Ah sorry, my bad. I'm not yet used to the uClinux guys touching "my"
>>> includes ;-)
>>> So we need better coordination between us.
>>>
>>> IIRC, Greg's changes were inspired by Andreas' patch.
>>
>> Yes, largely they are.
>>
>>
>>>> I have done a fixup (see below) and can carry it as necessary. Please
>>>> check the result.
>>>
>>> At first sight, it looks OK. Thanks for fixing it up!
>>
>> Yep, looks ok from what I can see.
>>
>> Geert, how do you want to handle for the real linus merge?
>> Do you want me to drop the changes to ptrace.h from that patch?
>
> I can apply your patch (modified to apply on top of Andreas') to the
> m68k for-linus branch.
> Does that sound OK for you?
Yep, thats fine by me.
Regards
Greg
>>>> --
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> Stephen Rothwell [email protected]
>>>>
>>>> diff --cc arch/m68k/include/asm/ptrace.h
>>>> index eef9309,beb2091..0000000
>>>> --- a/arch/m68k/include/asm/ptrace.h
>>>> +++ b/arch/m68k/include/asm/ptrace.h
>>>> @@@ -86,14 -84,15 +86,18 @@@ struct switch_stack
>>>> extern void show_regs(struct pt_regs *);
>>>>
>>>> /*
>>>> - * These are defined as per linux/ptrace.h.
>>>> + * These are defined as per linux/ptrace.h, which see.
>>>> */
>>>> + struct task_struct;
>>>> +
>>>> -#ifndef CONFIG_MMU
>>>> -#define arch_has_single_step() (1)
>>>> +#define arch_has_single_step() (1)
>>>> extern void user_enable_single_step(struct task_struct *);
>>>> extern void user_disable_single_step(struct task_struct *);
>>>> +
>>>> ++#ifdef CONFIG_MMU
>>>> +#define arch_has_block_step() (1)
>>>> +extern void user_enable_block_step(struct task_struct *);
>>>> + #endif
>>>>
>>>> #endif /* __KERNEL__ */
>>>> #endif /* __ASSEMBLY__ */
>
> Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
>
> Geert
>
> --
> Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- [email protected]
>
> In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
> when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
> -- Linus Torvalds
>
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Greg Ungerer -- Principal Engineer EMAIL: [email protected]
SnapGear Group, McAfee PHONE: +61 7 3435 2888
8 Gardner Close, FAX: +61 7 3891 3630
Milton, QLD, 4064, Australia WEB: http://www.SnapGear.com
On Fri, Nov 27, 2009 at 12:23, Greg Ungerer <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 11/27/2009 06:43 PM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
>> On Fri, Nov 27, 2009 at 05:43, Greg Ungerer<[email protected]> wrote:
>>> Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
>>>> On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 01:58, Stephen Rothwell<[email protected]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Today's linux-next merge of the m68knommu tree got a conflict in
>>>>> arch/m68k/include/asm/ptrace.h between commit
>>>>> 63c361b65f6540043c4baabf1a044a45c7465858 ("m68k: use generic code for
>>>>> ptrace requests") from the m68k tree and commit
>>>>> 03a03164e8084b810e9f92906a51232d63bac72c ("m68knommu: define
>>>>> arch_has_single_step() and friends") from the m68knommu tree.
>>>>>
>>>>> These mostly add the same stuff but not quite :-(
>>>>
>>>> Ah sorry, my bad. I'm not yet used to the uClinux guys touching "my"
>>>> includes ;-)
>>>> So we need better coordination between us.
>>>>
>>>> IIRC, Greg's changes were inspired by Andreas' patch.
>>>
>>> Yes, largely they are.
>>>
>>>
>>>>> I have done a fixup (see below) and can carry it as necessary. Please
>>>>> check the result.
>>>>
>>>> At first sight, it looks OK. Thanks for fixing it up!
>>>
>>> Yep, looks ok from what I can see.
>>>
>>> Geert, how do you want to handle for the real linus merge?
>>> Do you want me to drop the changes to ptrace.h from that patch?
>>
>> I can apply your patch (modified to apply on top of Andreas') to the
>> m68k for-linus branch.
>> Does that sound OK for you?
>
> Yep, thats fine by me.
Done.
I also added the #ifdef CONFIG_MMU to Andreas' commit, so it will stay
bisectable on m68knommu.
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- [email protected]
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds