[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4738EBB6.7060605@zytor.com>
Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2007 16:11:34 -0800
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To: Andi Kleen <ak@...e.de>
CC: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
"Siddha, Suresh B" <suresh.b.siddha@...el.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mingo@...e.hu, tglx@...utronix.de,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [patch] x86: fix taking DNA during 64bit sigreturn
Andi Kleen wrote:
>> 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.
>
Different ABIs clearly have to be handled, but I don't think that is a
huge deal. The i387 code overall (not just asm/i387.h) is very
different, though, and I find it unlikely that a properly unified code
is going to be ready and working in the 2.6.24 timeframe. I'm exploring
if a partial merge with high confidence level is feasible; either way, a
proper merge for 2.6.25 is probably the right thing.
-hpa
-
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