[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <200711122216.40663.ak@suse.de>
Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2007 22:16:40 +0100
From: Andi Kleen <ak@...e.de>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: "Siddha, Suresh B" <suresh.b.siddha@...el.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mingo@...e.hu, hpa@...or.com,
tglx@...utronix.de, akpm@...ux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [patch] x86: fix taking DNA during 64bit sigreturn
>
> The *real* fix for this is almost certainly to just get rid of the 64-bit
> code entirely, and use the 32-bit code as the base for one single unified
> setup.
That would likely break the ABI. x86-64 ABI is completely different here --
no ibcs, just pure x86 ISA.
I always thought direct FXSAVE from/to user space to be a cute trick, but yes
the exception Suresh noticed makes it lose some of its beauty.
> The 32-bit code should be largely a superset of the 64-bit code
> anyway, since it has to handle more cases, and does it more cleanly.
If you consider compat code 64bit handles as many cases as 32bit.
> which isn't exactly pretty, but the memory address generation works fine
> in 32-bit code too, and the rex override is easily done with
>
> #ifdef CONFIG_X86_64
> #define REX64 "rex64/"
> #else
> #define REX64 ""
> #endif
>
> and then you just use
>
> REX64 "fxsave"
That didn't work on older assemblers.
> But maybe I'm missing some reason why it doesn't matter. The 32-bit code
> was fixed back in 2003 (commit 5bff44fc272b948a85e893a007d01b9dfb3ad04f
64bit FPU semantics are somewhat different. I don't remember if this
particular issue was addressed or not, but I fixed a few shared
bugs in a quite different way on 64bit vs 32bit. If anybody wants
to change something here don't assume they are the same.
>From a cursory look it's probably broken though.
-Andi
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists