Received: by 2002:a25:ad19:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id y25csp3440085ybi; Fri, 19 Jul 2019 03:19:38 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqw0Hqqa3J7FXxSZ7OX7IZ91Drz83SLEY1rV/LRMprLFmFRcFhXqAQnFgdvMtuA2x8KHqOF1 X-Received: by 2002:a65:6216:: with SMTP id d22mr49229165pgv.404.1563531578205; Fri, 19 Jul 2019 03:19:38 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1563531578; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=TyLKNNFewpUmwTeHt5e5AvRmoifciDH2OH1bZMVMurw8UKiJqGPI3S/2nAbRS2isxm n0ZRADd1UWlHM6Q1sz3Y8RyM4Ei8/+hAOfkebaFb0COu3Mw8ncz2nsJvTUQ9qLQgeiAB 5xH7gJorOD0VJw/Cfidp6cOh/MWxieNDxvU/wZozze1/p5YRgXyIgQzyQcdbUzdqQDPI eVdCpK7OmZYEnf2ChbrTdAMODEm8sifS6OfvfE6Qn7eQaYWgyj5ZnDZWr1lgHV9uxPr2 8bugA9qTRicnThlTrLbV7XAUsp//ji2ce02EamB9oIhUv8yREgax1R1PYiXMxvOGo4Q2 R5LA== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:mime-version:message-id:date:references :in-reply-to:subject:cc:to:from; bh=RIpMxzOq/N4b/QsO+i+LmZvLRw7pB5f8EfXaRMhUruI=; b=Bw6tzZpeLW8sisgGS7XPAlY4ZNJF4F/fGHrMmZ4uB4V7uryB6w1MqsaVCOxretH/sR 22LtL3V0kikviyIoKHJDHD6zgeAxQ01zM4KYHMsFJY0hBto5IEonImZHoZDMFZqQasUv v4fVC3CQI/zF+O3WUvgLCrfXaNj8T0wJo4RFW1VZihYqaksPBVFdlkwBDO3y+dqyt3c5 0ZF/rsoG/yMtZ/5xLOVPy4rRJl7JOb+JgFUSh6HK1uul5a+79BxMEY9HhOTmLIGl/L8n YHJ0za6v4SqCtaXOIN0w+kCHh/HHTp8hBKe9IdGXfKtaoHieVLMZxXFifS1UcEKMqnhF dzvA== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id q26si608054pgm.188.2019.07.19.03.19.22; Fri, 19 Jul 2019 03:19:38 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727663AbfGSKSI (ORCPT + 99 others); Fri, 19 Jul 2019 06:18:08 -0400 Received: from bilbo.ozlabs.org ([203.11.71.1]:54409 "EHLO ozlabs.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727477AbfGSKSI (ORCPT ); Fri, 19 Jul 2019 06:18:08 -0400 Received: from authenticated.ozlabs.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange ECDHE (P-256) server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mail.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 45qn5722thz9s3Z; Fri, 19 Jul 2019 20:18:03 +1000 (AEST) From: Michael Ellerman To: Christian Brauner , Christian Borntraeger Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, arnd@arndb.de, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-alpha@vger.kernel.org, linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org, linux-m68k@lists.linux-m68k.org, linux-mips@vger.kernel.org, linux-parisc@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, linux-sh@vger.kernel.org, sparclinux@vger.kernel.org, Vasily Gorbik , Heiko Carstens Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] arch: mark syscall number 435 reserved for clone3 In-Reply-To: <20190716130631.tohj4ub54md25dys@brauner.io> References: <20190714192205.27190-1-christian@brauner.io> <20190714192205.27190-2-christian@brauner.io> <20190716130631.tohj4ub54md25dys@brauner.io> Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2019 20:18:02 +1000 Message-ID: <874l3i8h0l.fsf@concordia.ellerman.id.au> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Christian Brauner writes: > On Mon, Jul 15, 2019 at 03:56:04PM +0200, Christian Borntraeger wrote: >> I think Vasily already has a clone3 patch for s390x with 435. > > A quick follow-up on this. Helge and Michael have asked whether there > are any tests for clone3. Yes, there will be and I try to have them > ready by the end of the this or next week for review. In the meantime I > hope the following minimalistic test program that just verifies very > very basic functionality (It's not pretty.) will help you test: Hi Christian, Thanks for the test. This actually oopses on powerpc, it hits the BUG_ON in CHECK_FULL_REGS in process.c around line 1633: } else { /* user thread */ struct pt_regs *regs = current_pt_regs(); CHECK_FULL_REGS(regs); *childregs = *regs; if (usp) So I'll have to dig into how we fix that before we wire up clone3. Turns out testing is good! :) cheers