[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAHk-=whR7LzKcuB9Z2km1T25DUkJcbE9rNhCzApAPADbDqMhmQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2019 15:02:22 -0800
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
"the arch/x86 maintainers" <x86@...nel.org>,
Linux List Kernel Mailing <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>,
Jason Baron <jbaron@...mai.com>, Jiri Kosina <jkosina@...e.cz>,
David Laight <David.Laight@...lab.com>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Julia Cartwright <julia@...com>, Jessica Yu <jeyu@...nel.org>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Nadav Amit <namit@...are.com>,
Rasmus Villemoes <linux@...musvillemoes.dk>,
Edward Cree <ecree@...arflare.com>,
Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/6] Static calls
On Thu, Jan 10, 2019 at 12:52 PM Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com> wrote:
>
> Right, emulating a call instruction from the #BP handler is ugly,
> because you have to somehow grow the stack to make room for the return
> address. Personally I liked the idea of shifting the iret frame by 16
> bytes in the #DB entry code, but others hated it.
Yeah, I hated it.
But I'm starting to think it's the simplest solution.
So still not loving it, but all the other models have had huge issues too.
Linus
Powered by blists - more mailing lists