Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754496AbdCTQMq (ORCPT ); Mon, 20 Mar 2017 12:12:46 -0400 Received: from Galois.linutronix.de ([146.0.238.70]:39089 "EHLO Galois.linutronix.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753165AbdCTQL7 (ORCPT ); Mon, 20 Mar 2017 12:11:59 -0400 Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2017 16:00:16 +0100 (CET) From: Thomas Gleixner To: Kyle Huey cc: "Robert O'Callahan" , Andy Lutomirski , Ingo Molnar , "H. Peter Anvin" , x86@kernel.org, Paolo Bonzini , =?ISO-8859-2?Q?Radim_Kr=E8m=E1=F8?= , Jeff Dike , Richard Weinberger , Alexander Viro , Shuah Khan , Dave Hansen , Borislav Petkov , Peter Zijlstra , Boris Ostrovsky , Len Brown , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Dmitry Safonov , David Matlack , Nadav Amit , Andi Kleen , Grzegorz Andrejczuk , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, user-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, user-mode-linux-user@lists.sourceforge.net, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v16 08/10] x86/arch_prctl: Add ARCH_[GET|SET]_CPUID In-Reply-To: <20170320081628.18952-9-khuey@kylehuey.com> Message-ID: References: <20170320081628.18952-1-khuey@kylehuey.com> <20170320081628.18952-9-khuey@kylehuey.com> User-Agent: Alpine 2.20 (DEB 67 2015-01-07) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 737 Lines: 27 On Mon, 20 Mar 2017, Kyle Huey wrote: > --- a/arch/x86/include/uapi/asm/prctl.h > +++ b/arch/x86/include/uapi/asm/prctl.h > @@ -6,8 +6,17 @@ > #define ARCH_GET_FS 0x1003 > #define ARCH_GET_GS 0x1004 > > +#define ARCH_GET_CPUID 0x1005 > +#define ARCH_SET_CPUID 0x1006 > + > #define ARCH_MAP_VDSO_X32 0x2001 > #define ARCH_MAP_VDSO_32 0x2002 > #define ARCH_MAP_VDSO_64 0x2003 > > +#ifdef CONFIG_CHECKPOINT_RESTORE > +# define ARCH_MAP_VDSO_X32 0x2001 > +# define ARCH_MAP_VDSO_32 0x2002 > +# define ARCH_MAP_VDSO_64 0x2003 > +#endif That hunk is bogus in two aspects: - It's just a copy of the above wrapped in a ifdef - The ifdef is broken, because the UAPI headers do not know about that. I dropped it.