search for: setn

Hi experts, When I test lxc container with lxc-enter-namespace command, It reported an error as following: root@debian:~/github/libvirt# vir lxc-enter-namespace lxc --noseclabel /bin/df -hl error: Cannot get namespaces for 3145: Function not implemented It seems that setns is not supported by my kernel. But from the following info, It seemed the reason is just libvirt/autoconf doesn't recgonise setns. root@debian:~/github/libvirt# grep setns /proc/kallsyms ffffffff8105b78b T SyS_setns ffffffff8105b78b T sys_setns root@debian:~/github/libvirt# ./configure | grep...

...rts, > > When I test lxc container with lxc-enter-namespace command, It reported an error as > following: > root@debian:~/github/libvirt# vir lxc-enter-namespace lxc --noseclabel /bin/df -hl > error: Cannot get namespaces for 3145: Function not implemented > > It seems that setns is not supported by my kernel. > > But from the following info, It seemed the reason is just libvirt/autoconf doesn't > recgonise setns. > root@debian:~/github/libvirt# grep setns /proc/kallsyms > ffffffff8105b78b T SyS_setns > ffffffff8105b78b T sys_setns > root@debian:...

.../ns > > > >> ipc mnt net pid user uts > > > >> > > > >> What's the problem? > > > >> > > > > > > > > Does your system have system call setns? > > > > > > grep setns /proc/kallsyms > > > and > > > grep setns the config.log of libvirt. > > > > > > > > > Hi, Gaofeng, thanks for your help. The info you...

...:~$ <mailto:hzguanqiang@debian:~$> ls /proc/self/ns > > >> ipc mnt net pid user uts > > >> > > >> What's the problem? > > >> > > > > > > Does your system have system call setns? > > > > grep setns /proc/kallsyms > > and > > grep setns the config.log of libvirt. > > > > > > Hi, Gaofeng, thanks for your help. The info you want are: > > > > Hi, > &...

Hi Gaofeng, It seems that I've got the answer. In manual page about setns, it said that library support was added to glibc in version 2.14 while my libc version is 2.13. Thanks for help anyway. On 2013-12-09 13:22 , hzguanqiang@corp.netease.com wrote: On 2013-12-09 13:18 , Gao feng wrote: On 12/09/2013 01:06 PM, hzguanqiang@corp.netease.com wrote: > Hi experts, &gt...

...; >> > >> hzguanqiang@debian:~$ <mailto:hzguanqiang@debian:~$> ls /proc/self/ns > >> ipc mnt net pid user uts > >> > >> What's the problem? > >> > > > > Does your system have system call setns? > > grep setns /proc/kallsyms > and > grep setns the config.log of libvirt. > > > Hi, Gaofeng, thanks for your help. The info you want are: > Hi, > hzguanqiang@debian:~/github/libvirt$ <mailto:hzguanqiang@debian:~/github/libvirt$> sudo...

.../ns > > > >> ipc mnt net pid user uts > > > >> > > > >> What's the problem? > > > >> > > > > > > > > Does your system have system call setns? > > > > > > grep setns /proc/kallsyms > > > and > > > grep setns the config.log of libvirt. > > > > > > > > > Hi, Gaofeng, thanks for your help. The info you...

...error: Cannot get namespaces for 1545: Function not implemented >> >> hzguanqiang@debian:~$ <mailto:hzguanqiang@debian:~$> ls /proc/self/ns >> ipc mnt net pid user uts >> >> What's the problem? >> > > Does your system have system call setns? grep setns /proc/kallsyms and grep setns the config.log of libvirt.

...rts, > > When I test lxc container with lxc-enter-namespace command, It reported an error as > following: > root@debian:~/github/libvirt# vir lxc-enter-namespace lxc --noseclabel /bin/df -hl > error: Cannot get namespaces for 3145: Function not implemented > > It seems that setns is not supported by my kernel. > > But from the following info, It seemed the reason is just libvirt/autoconf doesn't > recgonise setns. > root@debian:~/github/libvirt# grep setns /proc/kallsyms > ffffffff8105b78b T SyS_setns > ffffffff8105b78b T sys_setns > root@debian:...

...:~$ <mailto:hzguanqiang@debian:~$> ls /proc/self/ns > > >> ipc mnt net pid user uts > > >> > > >> What's the problem? > > >> > > > > > > Does your system have system call setns? > > > > grep setns /proc/kallsyms > > and > > grep setns the config.log of libvirt. > > > > > > Hi, Gaofeng, thanks for your help. The info you want are: > > > > Hi, > &...

...; >> > >> hzguanqiang@debian:~$ <mailto:hzguanqiang@debian:~$> ls /proc/self/ns > >> ipc mnt net pid user uts > >> > >> What's the problem? > >> > > > > Does your system have system call setns? > > grep setns /proc/kallsyms > and > grep setns the config.log of libvirt. > > > Hi, Gaofeng, thanks for your help. The info you want are: > Hi, > hzguanqiang@debian:~/github/libvirt$ <mailto:hzguanqiang@debian:~/github/libvirt$> sudo...

...Zext t18, ValueType:ch:i1 t23: i1 = setcc t20, Constant:i32<0>, seteq:ch t25: i32,ch = CopyFromReg t0, Register:i32 %vreg396 t28: i1 = setcc t25, Constant:i32<255>, setugt:ch t29: i1 = and t23, t28 t37: i1 = setcc t29, Constant:i1<-1>, setne:ch t33: ch = brcond t16, t37, BasicBlock:ch<if.end65.1 0x7097330> t35: ch = br t33, BasicBlock:ch<if.then64.1 0x7097280> Here we see that the settcc has been legalized to xor, which I am fine with.. Legalizing: t37: i1 = setcc t29, Constant:i1<-1>, setne:ch Combining: t37...

..."cmpb $0, (%rdx,%rax);" Could we not put the $steal_time+16 displacement as an immediate in the cmpb and save a whole register here? That way we'd end up with something like: asm(" push %rdi; movslq %edi, %rdi; movq __per_cpu_offset(,%rdi,8), %rax; cmpb $0, %[offset](%rax); setne %al; pop %rdi; " : : [offset] "i" (((unsigned long)&steal_time) + offsetof(struct steal_time, preempted))); And if we could get rid of the sign extend on edi we could avoid all the push-pop nonsense, but I'm not sure I see how to do that (then again, this asm foo isn't...

..."cmpb $0, (%rdx,%rax);" Could we not put the $steal_time+16 displacement as an immediate in the cmpb and save a whole register here? That way we'd end up with something like: asm(" push %rdi; movslq %edi, %rdi; movq __per_cpu_offset(,%rdi,8), %rax; cmpb $0, %[offset](%rax); setne %al; pop %rdi; " : : [offset] "i" (((unsigned long)&steal_time) + offsetof(struct steal_time, preempted))); And if we could get rid of the sign extend on edi we could avoid all the push-pop nonsense, but I'm not sure I see how to do that (then again, this asm foo isn't...

what's the semantics for setCC if one of the operands is NULL pointer? %ptr=alloc int seteq int*, %pt, NULL what's the result for the second instruction? How about setne, setlt, setgt, setle, and setge? Thanks! Jianzhong

...t23: i1 = setcc t20, Constant:i32<0>, seteq:ch >> t25: i32,ch = CopyFromReg t0, Register:i32 %vreg396 >> t28: i1 = setcc t25, Constant:i32<255>, setugt:ch >> t29: i1 = and t23, t28 >> t37: i1 = setcc t29, Constant:i1<-1>, setne:ch >> t33: ch = brcond t16, t37, BasicBlock:ch<if.end65.1 0x7097330> >> t35: ch = br t33, BasicBlock:ch<if.then64.1 0x7097280> >> Here we see that the settcc has been legalized to xor, which I am fine with.. >> Legalizing: t37: i1 = setcc t29, Constant:i1...

...case ISD::SETGE: case ISD::SETOGE: CondCode = XXXCC::COND_GE; break; case ISD::SETOLT: case ISD::SETLT: CondCode = XXXCC::COND_LT; break; case ISD::SETOLE: case ISD::SETLE: CondCode = XXXCC::COND_LE; break; case ISD::SETONE: case ISD::SETNE: CondCode = XXXCC::COND_NE; break; case ISD::SETUO: CondCode = XXXCC::COND_UN; break; case ISD::SETO: case ISD::SETUEQ: case ISD::SETUGT: case ISD::SETUGE: case ISD::SETULT: case ISD::SETULE: case ISD::SETUNE: CC = getSetCCInverse(CC,fa...

...ote: > >>> That way we'd end up with something like: > >>> > >>> asm(" > >>> push %rdi; > >>> movslq %edi, %rdi; > >>> movq __per_cpu_offset(,%rdi,8), %rax; > >>> cmpb $0, %[offset](%rax); > >>> setne %al; > >>> pop %rdi; > >>> " : : [offset] "i" (((unsigned long)&steal_time) + offsetof(struct steal_time, preempted))); > >>> > >>> And if we could get rid of the sign extend on edi we could avoid all the > >>> push-pop...

...ote: > >>> That way we'd end up with something like: > >>> > >>> asm(" > >>> push %rdi; > >>> movslq %edi, %rdi; > >>> movq __per_cpu_offset(,%rdi,8), %rax; > >>> cmpb $0, %[offset](%rax); > >>> setne %al; > >>> pop %rdi; > >>> " : : [offset] "i" (((unsigned long)&steal_time) + offsetof(struct steal_time, preempted))); > >>> > >>> And if we could get rid of the sign extend on edi we could avoid all the > >>> push-pop...

...wrote: > On Mon, Feb 13, 2017 at 11:47:16AM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote: >> That way we'd end up with something like: >> >> asm(" >> push %rdi; >> movslq %edi, %rdi; >> movq __per_cpu_offset(,%rdi,8), %rax; >> cmpb $0, %[offset](%rax); >> setne %al; >> pop %rdi; >> " : : [offset] "i" (((unsigned long)&steal_time) + offsetof(struct steal_time, preempted))); >> >> And if we could get rid of the sign extend on edi we could avoid all the >> push-pop nonsense, but I'm not sure I see how to...