Re: [PATCH v2] kselftests: mm: Fix wrong __NR_userfaultfd value

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 23.09.24 07:38, Muhammad Usama Anjum wrote:
grep -rnIF "#define __NR_userfaultfd"
tools/include/uapi/asm-generic/unistd.h:681:#define __NR_userfaultfd 282
arch/x86/include/generated/uapi/asm/unistd_32.h:374:#define
__NR_userfaultfd 374
arch/x86/include/generated/uapi/asm/unistd_64.h:327:#define
__NR_userfaultfd 323
arch/x86/include/generated/uapi/asm/unistd_x32.h:282:#define
__NR_userfaultfd (__X32_SYSCALL_BIT + 323)
arch/arm/include/generated/uapi/asm/unistd-eabi.h:347:#define
__NR_userfaultfd (__NR_SYSCALL_BASE + 388)
arch/arm/include/generated/uapi/asm/unistd-oabi.h:359:#define
__NR_userfaultfd (__NR_SYSCALL_BASE + 388)
include/uapi/asm-generic/unistd.h:681:#define __NR_userfaultfd 282

The number is dependent on the architecture. The above data shows that:
x86	374
x86_64	323

The value of __NR_userfaultfd was changed to 282 when
asm-generic/unistd.h was included. It makes the test to fail every time
as the correct number of this syscall on x86_64 is 323. Fix the header
to asm/unistd.h.

Fixes: a5c6bc590094 ("selftests/mm: remove local __NR_* definitions")
Signed-off-by: Muhammad Usama Anjum <usama.anjum@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>

Reviewed-by: David Hildenbrand <david@xxxxxxxxxx>

--
Cheers,

David / dhildenb





[Index of Archives]     [Linux Wireless]     [Linux Kernel]     [ATH6KL]     [Linux Bluetooth]     [Linux Netdev]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Share Photos]     [IDE]     [Security]     [Git]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux ATA RAID]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]

  Powered by Linux