[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20110821145126.GK2203@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
Date: Sun, 21 Aug 2011 15:51:26 +0100
From: Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
To: Andrew Lutomirski <luto@....edu>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, mingo@...hat.com,
Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>,
user-mode-linux-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: SYSCALL, ptrace and syscall restart breakages (Re: [RFC] weird
crap with vdso on uml/i386)
On Sun, Aug 21, 2011 at 09:37:18AM -0400, Andrew Lutomirski wrote:
> Gack. Is this a holdover from the 32-bit code that shares the
> argument save area with the parameters passed on the C stack? If so,
> we could just set up the argument save area honestly and pass the real
> parameters in registers like 64-bit C code expects.
>
> If the tracing and restart cases use iret to return to userspace, this
> should all just work. ptrace users shouldn't notice the overhead, and
> syscall restart is presumably slow enough anyway that it wouldn't
> matter. The userspace entry code would be as simple as:
>
> sysenter
> ret
>
> or
>
> sysexit
> ret
You are making no sense at all...
--
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