Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/5] uapi: always define F_GETLK64/F_SETLK64/F_SETLKW64 in
 fcntl.h
To:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Cc:     Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
        Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
        Thomas Bogendoerfer <tsbogend@alpha.franken.de>,
        "James E.J. Bottomley" <James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com>,
        Heiko Carstens <hca@linux.ibm.com>,
        Vasily Gorbik <gor@linux.ibm.com>,
        Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-mips@vger.kernel.org
References: <20210412085545.2595431-1-hch@lst.de>
 <20210412085545.2595431-5-hch@lst.de>
 <da779585-60c6-2f4b-feaf-db45e1eef262@gmx.de> <20210413154646.GC27287@lst.de>
From:   Helge Deller <deller@gmx.de>
Message-ID: <7fcbc112-265a-c3bd-e76f-a73c6e2c936c@gmx.de>
Date:   Tue, 13 Apr 2021 17:58:08 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/78.8.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20210413154646.GC27287@lst.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Precedence: bulk

On 4/13/21 5:46 PM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 13, 2021 at 05:43:18PM +0200, Helge Deller wrote:
>> On 4/12/21 10:55 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>>> The F_GETLK64/F_SETLK64/F_SETLKW64 commands are only implemented for
>>> 32-bit syscall APIs, but we also need them for compat handling on 64-b=
it
>>> kernels.
>>
>> Ok.
>>
>>> Given that redefining them is rather error prone, as shown by parisc
>>> getting the opcodes wrong currently, just use the existing definitions
>>> for the compat handling.
>>
>> Can you please show me where parisc gets it currently wrong?
>> I'm somehow blind to see it and of course I'd like to fix it in
>> stable kernel series if that's true...
>
> Looking again I think my comment was wrong, I thought parisc would
> fall back to the asm-generic version with different code points for
> the compat case, but parisc actually already defines the constants
> unconditionally like this patch does for everyone else.  So I'll
> retract that part of the comment.

Ok, good.
Thanks for checking!

Helge