[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <48351E49.8000707@zytor.com>
Date: Thu, 22 May 2008 00:18:33 -0700
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To: Roland McGrath <roland@...hat.com>
CC: Suresh Siddha <suresh.b.siddha@...el.com>,
Mikael Pettersson <mikpe@...uu.se>,
Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>, mingo@...e.hu,
tglx@...utronix.de, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, drepper@...hat.com,
Hongjiu.lu@...el.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
arjan@...ux.intel.com, rmk+lkml@....linux.org.uk, dan@...ian.org,
asit.k.mallick@...el.com
Subject: Re: [RFC] x86: xsave/xrstor support, ucontext_t extensions
Roland McGrath wrote:
>> Yes, but I suspect for legacy apps running without vDSO might matter.
>
> "Legacy" apps want to be changed to make a new kind of kernel query
> and care about new details of signal frame layout for new features
> they never used before, but don't want to handle the vDSO?
I'm talking mostly about semi-embedded ISVs that have managed to get
themselves funny ideas about what they don't want to change. The vDSO
definitely involves more machinery to get to.
-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