[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CALCETrXt4xNCW9+UbEzhST5Eo6s9ymNOc16C+EGi2Pr=GrEZuA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 6 Oct 2014 16:54:06 -0700
From: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
To: David Daney <ddaney@...iumnetworks.com>
Cc: Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org>, David Daney <ddaney.cavm@...il.com>,
libc-alpha <libc-alpha@...rceware.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux MIPS Mailing List <linux-mips@...ux-mips.org>,
David Daney <david.daney@...ium.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH resend] MIPS: Allow FPU emulator to use non-stack area.
On Mon, Oct 6, 2014 at 4:48 PM, David Daney <ddaney@...iumnetworks.com> wrote:
> On 10/06/2014 04:38 PM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>>
>> On 10/06/2014 02:58 PM, Rich Felker wrote:
>>>
>>> On Mon, Oct 06, 2014 at 02:45:29PM -0700, David Daney wrote:
>
> [...]
>>>
>>> This is a huge ill-designed mess.
>>
>>
>> Amen.
>>
>> Can the kernel not just emulate the instructions directly?
>
>
> In theory it could, but since there can be implementation defined
> instructions, there is no way to achieve full instruction set coverage for
> all possible machines.
Can modern user code just avoid constructs that require this kind of
trampoline hack? If so, can this be solved the same way that x86
added no-exec stacks? (I.e. mark all the binaries as supporting
non-executable stacks and letting them crash if they screw it up.)
Knowing very little about MIPS, it sounds like this is the kernel
compensating for a dumb assembler.
--Andy
--
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