1. 13 11月, 2006 1 次提交
  2. 30 9月, 2006 2 次提交
    • S
      [PATCH] pidspace: is_init() · f400e198
      Sukadev Bhattiprolu 提交于
      This is an updated version of Eric Biederman's is_init() patch.
      (http://lkml.org/lkml/2006/2/6/280).  It applies cleanly to 2.6.18-rc3 and
      replaces a few more instances of ->pid == 1 with is_init().
      
      Further, is_init() checks pid and thus removes dependency on Eric's other
      patches for now.
      
      Eric's original description:
      
      	There are a lot of places in the kernel where we test for init
      	because we give it special properties.  Most  significantly init
      	must not die.  This results in code all over the kernel test
      	->pid == 1.
      
      	Introduce is_init to capture this case.
      
      	With multiple pid spaces for all of the cases affected we are
      	looking for only the first process on the system, not some other
      	process that has pid == 1.
      Signed-off-by: NEric W. Biederman <ebiederm@xmission.com>
      Signed-off-by: NSukadev Bhattiprolu <sukadev@us.ibm.com>
      Cc: Dave Hansen <haveblue@us.ibm.com>
      Cc: Serge Hallyn <serue@us.ibm.com>
      Cc: Cedric Le Goater <clg@fr.ibm.com>
      Cc: <lxc-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>
      Acked-by: NPaul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>
      Signed-off-by: NAndrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
      Signed-off-by: NLinus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
      f400e198
    • J
      [PATCH] make PROT_WRITE imply PROT_READ · df67b3da
      Jason Baron 提交于
      Make PROT_WRITE imply PROT_READ for a number of architectures which don't
      support write only in hardware.
      
      While looking at this, I noticed that some architectures which do not
      support write only mappings already take the exact same approach.  For
      example, in arch/alpha/mm/fault.c:
      
      "
              if (cause < 0) {
                      if (!(vma->vm_flags & VM_EXEC))
                              goto bad_area;
              } else if (!cause) {
                      /* Allow reads even for write-only mappings */
                      if (!(vma->vm_flags & (VM_READ | VM_WRITE)))
                              goto bad_area;
              } else {
                      if (!(vma->vm_flags & VM_WRITE))
                              goto bad_area;
              }
      "
      
      Thus, this patch brings other architectures which do not support write only
      mappings in-line and consistent with the rest.  I've verified the patch on
      ia64, x86_64 and x86.
      
      Additional discussion:
      
      Several architectures, including x86, can not support write-only mappings.
      The pte for x86 reserves a single bit for protection and its two states are
      read only or read/write.  Thus, write only is not supported in h/w.
      
      Currently, if i 'mmap' a page write-only, the first read attempt on that page
      creates a page fault and will SEGV.  That check is enforced in
      arch/blah/mm/fault.c.  However, if i first write that page it will fault in
      and the pte will be set to read/write.  Thus, any subsequent reads to the page
      will succeed.  It is this inconsistency in behavior that this patch is
      attempting to address.  Furthermore, if the page is swapped out, and then
      brought back the first read will also cause a SEGV.  Thus, any arbitrary read
      on a page can potentially result in a SEGV.
      
      According to the SuSv3 spec, "if the application requests only PROT_WRITE, the
      implementation may also allow read access." Also as mentioned, some
      archtectures, such as alpha, shown above already take the approach that i am
      suggesting.
      
      The counter-argument to this raised by Arjan, is that the kernel is enforcing
      the write only mapping the best it can given the h/w limitations.  This is
      true, however Alan Cox, and myself would argue that the inconsitency in
      behavior, that is applications can sometimes work/sometimes fails is highly
      undesireable.  If you read through the thread, i think people, came to an
      agreement on the last patch i posted, as nobody has objected to it...
      Signed-off-by: NJason Baron <jbaron@redhat.com>
      Cc: Russell King <rmk@arm.linux.org.uk>
      Cc: "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@intel.com>
      Cc: Hugh Dickins <hugh@veritas.com>
      Cc: Roman Zippel <zippel@linux-m68k.org>
      Cc: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>
      Cc: Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>
      Cc: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
      Acked-by: NAndi Kleen <ak@muc.de>
      Acked-by: NAlan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
      Cc: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@linux.intel.com>
      Acked-by: NPaul Mundt <lethal@linux-sh.org>
      Cc: Kazumoto Kojima <kkojima@rr.iij4u.or.jp>
      Cc: Ian Molton <spyro@f2s.com>
      Signed-off-by: NAndrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
      Signed-off-by: NLinus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
      df67b3da
  3. 01 7月, 2006 1 次提交
  4. 27 6月, 2006 1 次提交
  5. 01 4月, 2006 1 次提交
  6. 29 3月, 2006 1 次提交
  7. 10 2月, 2006 1 次提交
  8. 09 1月, 2006 1 次提交
  9. 07 11月, 2005 1 次提交
  10. 27 10月, 2005 1 次提交
  11. 26 9月, 2005 1 次提交
    • P
      powerpc: Merge enough to start building in arch/powerpc. · 14cf11af
      Paul Mackerras 提交于
      This creates the directory structure under arch/powerpc and a bunch
      of Kconfig files.  It does a first-cut merge of arch/powerpc/mm,
      arch/powerpc/lib and arch/powerpc/platforms/powermac.  This is enough
      to build a 32-bit powermac kernel with ARCH=powerpc.
      
      For now we are getting some unmerged files from arch/ppc/kernel and
      arch/ppc/syslib, or arch/ppc64/kernel.  This makes some minor changes
      to files in those directories and files outside arch/powerpc.
      
      The boot directory is still not merged.  That's going to be interesting.
      Signed-off-by: NPaul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>
      14cf11af
  12. 18 9月, 2005 1 次提交
  13. 12 9月, 2005 1 次提交
  14. 08 9月, 2005 1 次提交
  15. 17 4月, 2005 1 次提交
    • L
      Linux-2.6.12-rc2 · 1da177e4
      Linus Torvalds 提交于
      Initial git repository build. I'm not bothering with the full history,
      even though we have it. We can create a separate "historical" git
      archive of that later if we want to, and in the meantime it's about
      3.2GB when imported into git - space that would just make the early
      git days unnecessarily complicated, when we don't have a lot of good
      infrastructure for it.
      
      Let it rip!
      1da177e4