On 22 March 2018 at 13:49, Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wed, Mar 21, 2018 at 11:20:04PM +0530, Naresh Kamboju wrote: >> On 21 March 2018 at 19:02, Greg Kroah-Hartman >> <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > On Tue, Mar 20, 2018 at 11:49:19PM +0000, Ben Hutchings wrote: >> >> On Sun, 2018-03-18 at 11:27 +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: >> >> > On Sat, Mar 17, 2018 at 03:48:24PM +0530, Naresh Kamboju wrote: >> >> [...] >> >> > > Results from Linaro’s test farm. >> >> > > No regressions on arm64, arm, qemu_x86_64 and x86_64. >> >> > > >> >> > > NOTE: >> >> > > CONFIG_LEGACY_VSYSCALL_EMULATE=y is enabled from config as default. >> >> > > Enabled vsyscall=native and vsyscall=none from kernel command line for testing >> >> > > selftests/x86/test_vsyscall test case on x86_64 and qemu_x86_64. >> >> > > >> >> > > test_vdso_64 failed on x86_64 device when vsyscall=none is enabled. >> >> > > We will investigate this new test failure. >> >> > >> >> > I think vsyscall=none just went away :) >> >> >> >> No, vsyscall=native went away upstream. vsyscall=none should still >> >> work everywhere. >> > >> > Ah, sorry, got that wrong, thanks for the correction. >> > >> >> However, test_vdso_64 isn't able to detect what the current >> >> configuration is and it will crash with vsyscall=none (or the >> >> equivalent default in kconfig). >> >> >> Shall i skip running "test_vdso_64" when vsyscall=none ? >> or >> Shall we fix the test case to work when vsyscall=none ? > > Why not start a new email thread with the author of that test to get the > right people involved here? > > But first verify that it all works on the 4.15.y tree. Thanks for the suggestion. I will start a new thread on this topic. - Naresh > > thanks, > > greg k-h