[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <G3IQ2T.YZ8RX05BU5F81@cock.li>
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2025 16:14:04 +0300
From: kemal <kmal@...k.li>
To: Jinjie Ruan <ruanjinjie@...wei.com>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>, linux-kernel
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -next v6 10/10] arm64: entry: Convert to generic entry
On Çrş, Sep 17 2025 at 09:55:35 +08:00:00, Jinjie Ruan
<ruanjinjie@...wei.com> wrote:
> Thank you! I will try to implement arch_syscall_is_vdso_sigreturn() as
> this and test it. By the way, is this for supporting arm64 in wine?
No, I don't even know if arm64 windows binaries do direct
syscalls. This is meant for some other project.
>>
>> 2 - This trick shouldn't be done if the syscall will be catched by
>> SUD:
>> if (scno == NO_SYSCALL)
>> syscall_set_return_value(current, regs, -ENOSYS, 0);
>> As the ABI could be anything.
>>
> This requires discussion with Catalin and Will, which may alter the
> original intent.
Sorry, I didnt read the code carefully, syscall_user_dispatch()
already calls syscall_rollback() which should restore x0 from
orig_x0.
You can test SUD using the selftest, but you need to add these
lines at the end of handle_sigsys() in sud_test.c:
#ifdef __aarch64__
((ucontext_t *)ucontext)->uc_mcontext.regs[0] = (unsigned int)
((ucontext_t *)ucontext)->uc_mcontext.regs[8];
#endif
and you should define TEST_BLOCKED_RETURN in sud_benchmark.c
to make sure arch_syscall_is_vdso_sigreturn works properly
-kemal
>>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists