[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4B672C31.9070302@zytor.com>
Date: Mon, 01 Feb 2010 11:32:01 -0800
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
CC: Michal Simek <michal.simek@...alogix.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
John Williams <john.williams@...alogix.com>
Subject: Re: Split 'flush_old_exec' into two functions - 221af7f87b97431e3ee21ce4b0e77d5411cf1549
On 02/01/2010 07:57 AM, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> That said, Microblaze is not one of the architectures I would have
> expected to have problems. It has one of the most straightforward
> "flush_thread()" implementations in the whole kernel (it's a no-op ;), and
> that's where most of the hacky things were for the architectures that
> needed the change. And it has no "arch_pick_mmap_layout()" issues or
> anything else that tends to depend on personality bits or whatever.
>
> Microblaze is a no-MMU platform, isn't it? Which binary format does it
> use? It looks like _some_ binaries work (it seems to happily be running a
> shell to actually do those startup scripts) while others have problems. Is
> there a difference between "/bin/sh" and the binaries that seem to be
> problematic (like /bin/mount and /bin/ifup).
>
> Are the failing binaries all setuid ones, for example? Or shared vs
> non-shared? Or ELF vs FLAT or whatever?
>
Another thing... it looks like you [Michal] is running a test image
under Qemu... could you perhaps point us to that image or another test
image which reproduces the problem?
Nothing like having a hands-on testcase...
-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