From: Paul Mundt <lethal@linux-sh.org>
To: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@tv-sign.ru>
Cc: John Reiser <jreiser@BitWagon.com>, Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: + fully-honor-vdso_enabled.patch added to -mm tree
Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2007 19:56:29 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20070305105629.GA13070@linux-sh.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20070305105444.GA85@tv-sign.ru>
On Mon, Mar 05, 2007 at 01:54:44PM +0300, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> On 03/05, Paul Mundt wrote:
> > - if (current->binfmt->hasvdso)
> > + if (current->binfmt->hasvdso && current->mm->context.vdso)
>
> I think this is correct, but a bit strange.
>
> The "->context.vdso != NULL" check relies on the fact that .vdso == NULL
> after mm_alloc (because arch_setup_additional_pages() doesn' initialize
> it when vdso_enabled == 0, and it has to be != NULL otherwise).
>
> This means that binfmt->hasvdso in essence is not used, at least for i386.
> Isn't it better to kill ->hasvdso and just use ->context.vdso ? Every usage
> of ->hasvdso should also check ->context.vdso anyway.
>
That was my thought as well, it looks like it's only needed for x86_64. We
don't look at binfmt->hasvdso on SH at all at least, and it works fine
there.. I left it in in the patch since I figured x86 had a reason for
checking it, but perhaps someone who knows the x86/x86_64 interaction
can comment on this.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-03-05 10:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-03-01 17:52 + fully-honor-vdso_enabled.patch added to -mm tree Oleg Nesterov
2007-03-02 3:48 ` Paul Mundt
2007-03-02 19:32 ` Oleg Nesterov
2007-03-02 21:19 ` John Reiser
2007-03-03 17:38 ` Oleg Nesterov
2007-03-02 21:06 ` John Reiser
2007-03-02 22:18 ` Oleg Nesterov
2007-03-05 10:12 ` Paul Mundt
2007-03-05 10:54 ` Oleg Nesterov
2007-03-05 10:56 ` Paul Mundt [this message]
2007-03-02 22:19 ` Chuck Ebbert
2007-03-02 23:11 ` Oleg Nesterov
2007-03-02 23:33 ` John Reiser
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2007-03-01 5:33 akpm
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=20070305105629.GA13070@linux-sh.org \
--to=lethal@linux-sh.org \
--cc=ak@suse.de \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=arjan@infradead.org \
--cc=jreiser@BitWagon.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=oleg@tv-sign.ru \
/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.