From: Russell King <rmk+lkml@arm.linux.org.uk>
To: blaisorblade@yahoo.it
Cc: akpm@osdl.org, jdike@addtoit.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
user-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: [uml-devel] Re: [patch 1/1] uml: fix lvalue for gcc4
Date: Sat, 9 Jul 2005 12:07:03 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20050709120703.C2175@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20050709110143.D59181E9EA4@zion.home.lan>; from blaisorblade@yahoo.it on Sat, Jul 09, 2005 at 01:01:33PM +0200
On Sat, Jul 09, 2005 at 01:01:33PM +0200, blaisorblade@yahoo.it wrote:
> diff -puN arch/um/sys-x86_64/signal.c~uml-fix-for-gcc4-lvalue arch/um/sys-x86_64/signal.c
> --- linux-2.6.git/arch/um/sys-x86_64/signal.c~uml-fix-for-gcc4-lvalue 2005-07-09 13:01:03.000000000 +0200
> +++ linux-2.6.git-paolo/arch/um/sys-x86_64/signal.c 2005-07-09 13:01:03.000000000 +0200
> @@ -168,7 +168,7 @@ int setup_signal_stack_si(unsigned long
>
> frame = (struct rt_sigframe __user *)
> round_down(stack_top - sizeof(struct rt_sigframe), 16) - 8;
> - ((unsigned char *) frame) -= 128;
> + frame -= 128 / sizeof(frame);
Are you sure these two are identical?
The above code fragment looks suspicious anyway, particularly:
frame = (struct rt_sigframe __user *)
round_down(stack_top - sizeof(struct rt_sigframe), 16) - 8;
which will put the frame at 8 * sizeof(struct rt_sigframe) below
the point which round_down() would return (which would be 1 struct
rt_sigframe below stack_top, rounded down).
--
Russell King
Linux kernel 2.6 ARM Linux - http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/
maintainer of: 2.6 Serial core
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the 'Do More With Dual!' webinar happening
July 14 at 8am PDT/11am EDT. We invite you to explore the latest in dual
core and dual graphics technology at this free one hour event hosted by HP,
AMD, and NVIDIA. To register visit http://www.hp.com/go/dualwebinar
_______________________________________________
User-mode-linux-devel mailing list
User-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/user-mode-linux-devel
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Russell King <rmk+lkml@arm.linux.org.uk>
To: blaisorblade@yahoo.it
Cc: akpm@osdl.org, jdike@addtoit.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
user-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [patch 1/1] uml: fix lvalue for gcc4
Date: Sat, 9 Jul 2005 12:07:03 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20050709120703.C2175@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20050709110143.D59181E9EA4@zion.home.lan>; from blaisorblade@yahoo.it on Sat, Jul 09, 2005 at 01:01:33PM +0200
On Sat, Jul 09, 2005 at 01:01:33PM +0200, blaisorblade@yahoo.it wrote:
> diff -puN arch/um/sys-x86_64/signal.c~uml-fix-for-gcc4-lvalue arch/um/sys-x86_64/signal.c
> --- linux-2.6.git/arch/um/sys-x86_64/signal.c~uml-fix-for-gcc4-lvalue 2005-07-09 13:01:03.000000000 +0200
> +++ linux-2.6.git-paolo/arch/um/sys-x86_64/signal.c 2005-07-09 13:01:03.000000000 +0200
> @@ -168,7 +168,7 @@ int setup_signal_stack_si(unsigned long
>
> frame = (struct rt_sigframe __user *)
> round_down(stack_top - sizeof(struct rt_sigframe), 16) - 8;
> - ((unsigned char *) frame) -= 128;
> + frame -= 128 / sizeof(frame);
Are you sure these two are identical?
The above code fragment looks suspicious anyway, particularly:
frame = (struct rt_sigframe __user *)
round_down(stack_top - sizeof(struct rt_sigframe), 16) - 8;
which will put the frame at 8 * sizeof(struct rt_sigframe) below
the point which round_down() would return (which would be 1 struct
rt_sigframe below stack_top, rounded down).
--
Russell King
Linux kernel 2.6 ARM Linux - http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/
maintainer of: 2.6 Serial core
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-07-09 11:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-07-09 11:01 [uml-devel] [patch 1/1] uml: fix lvalue for gcc4 blaisorblade
2005-07-09 11:01 ` blaisorblade
2005-07-09 11:07 ` Russell King [this message]
2005-07-09 11:07 ` Russell King
2005-07-11 19:12 ` [uml-devel] unregister_netdevice: waiting for tap24 to become free Peter
2005-07-11 19:12 ` Peter
2005-07-11 22:20 ` [uml-devel] " Blaisorblade
2005-07-11 22:20 ` Blaisorblade
2005-07-11 22:26 ` [uml-devel] " Peter
2005-07-11 22:26 ` Peter
2005-07-11 22:47 ` [uml-devel] " Blaisorblade
2005-07-11 22:47 ` Blaisorblade
2005-07-14 9:20 ` [uml-devel] " Peter
2005-07-14 9:20 ` Peter
2005-07-11 22:05 ` [uml-devel] Re: [patch 1/1] uml: fix lvalue for gcc4 Blaisorblade
2005-07-11 22:05 ` Blaisorblade
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20050709120703.C2175@flint.arm.linux.org.uk \
--to=rmk+lkml@arm.linux.org.uk \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=blaisorblade@yahoo.it \
--cc=jdike@addtoit.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=user-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.