Patch from Nicolas Pitre
There is no need to define __ARCH_WANT_SYS_FADVISE64 on ARM since it
only serves to compile in a compatibility wrapper for sys_fadvise64
which never was tied to any syscall number.
Signed-off-by: Nicolas Pitre <nico@cam.org>
Signed-off-by: Russell King <rmk+kernel@arm.linux.org.uk>
Patch from Nicolas Pitre
This patch entirely reworks the kernel assistance for NPTL on ARM.
In particular this provides an efficient way to retrieve the TLS
value and perform atomic operations without any instruction emulation
nor special system call. This even allows for pre ARMv6 binaries to
be forward compatible with SMP systems without any penalty.
The problematic and performance critical operations are performed
through segment of kernel provided user code reachable from user space
at a fixed address in kernel memory. Those fixed entry points are
within the vector page so we basically get it for free as no extra
memory page is required and nothing else may be mapped at that
location anyway.
This is different from (but doesn't preclude) a full blown VDSO
implementation, however a VDSO would prevent some assembly tricks with
constants that allows for efficient branching to those code segments.
And since those code segments only use a few cycles before returning to
user code, the overhead of a VDSO far call would add a significant
overhead to such minimalistic operations.
The ARM_NR_set_tls syscall also changed number. This is done for two
reasons:
1) this patch changes the way the TLS value was previously meant to be
retrieved, therefore we ensure whatever library using the old way
gets fixed (they only exist in private tree at the moment since the
NPTL work is still progressing).
2) the previous number was allocated in a range causing an undefined
instruction trap on kernels not supporting that syscall and it was
determined that allocating it in a range returning -ENOSYS would be
much nicer for libraries trying to determine if the feature is
present or not.
Signed-off-by: Nicolas Pitre
Signed-off-by: Russell King <rmk+kernel@arm.linux.org.uk>
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!
Nicolas Pitre