[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20081228190840.GD496@one.firstfloor.org>
Date: Sun, 28 Dec 2008 20:08:40 +0100
From: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
To: Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>
Cc: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>, x86@...nel.org,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
KVM list <kvm@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] Remove interrupt stack table usage from x86_64 kernel
On Sun, Dec 28, 2008 at 04:09:26PM +0200, Avi Kivity wrote:
> I don't see how syscall could work on i386, and indeed:
i386 has task gates which support unconditional stack switching. But there
are no 64bit task gates, just ISTs.
BTW I think there are more similar problems in your patch too.
>
> >vdso32.so-$(VDSO32-y) += int80
> >vdso32.so-$(CONFIG_COMPAT) += syscall
> >vdso32.so-$(VDSO32-y) += sysenter
>
> It's disabled. Is that the reason?
No. All interesting 32bit CPUs have SYSENTER; the only one who has SYSCALL
but no SYSENTER is the K6, but it has a weird early variant of SYSCALL with
more problems which was never worth supporting.
-Andi
--
ak@...ux.intel.com
--
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