From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 23:41:54 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 23:41:53 -0500 Received: from cpe-24-221-190-179.ca.sprintbbd.net ([24.221.190.179]:60856 "EHLO myware.akkadia.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 23:41:52 -0500 Message-ID: <3E1121F7.60808@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 20:49:59 -0800 From: Ulrich Drepper Organization: Red Hat, Inc. User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.3b) Gecko/20021224 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Linus Torvalds CC: Linux Kernel , Jakub Jelinek , Ingo Molnar Subject: Re: glibc binaries w/ sysenter support References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Linus Torvalds wrote: > can you tell me what the new glibc does for different "clone()" system > calls? clone() and vfork() both use int $0x80. The vfork() problem is obvious. And the way we use clone() with a separate stack for the child it is easy to see that we cannot prepare the stack appropriately for both situations. When the child is started it returns with a carefully crafted stack which among other values find the start functions address on the stack. There might be a way to make this use int and vsyscall at the same time but I don't think it is worth it. -- --------------. ,-. 444 Castro Street Ulrich Drepper \ ,-----------------' \ Mountain View, CA 94041 USA Red Hat `--' drepper at redhat.com `---------------------------