From: David Mosberger <davidm@napali.hpl.hp.com>
To: linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [Linux-ia64] Re: [RFC] proposed change for syscall stub
Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 01:11:13 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <marc-linux-ia64-105590709805675@msgid-missing> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <marc-linux-ia64-105590709805643@msgid-missing>
>>>>> "Peter" = Peter Chubb <peter@chubb.wattle.id.au> writes:
>>>>> "David" = David Mosberger <davidm@napali.hpl.hp.com> writes:
David> really_new_syscall_stub:
David> adds r2 = SYSINFO_OFF, r13;;
David> ld8 r2 = [r2]
David> mov r9 = ar.pfs;;
David> mov r15 = SYSCALL_NR
David> mov b7 = r2
David> br.call.sptk.many b6 = b7;;
David> cmp.eq p6,p0 = -1, r10
David> mov ar.pfs = r9
David> (p6) br.cond.spnt.few syscall_error
David> br.ret.sptk.many rp;;
David> Here, SYSINFO_OFF is the offset in the user-level
David> thread-control-block at which the system call entry point is
David> stored. glibc initializes this value to point to the
David> following piece of code:
Peter> The ABI only allows 16 bytes for the TCB pointed to by R13;
Peter> the first 8 bytes are a pointer to the dynamic thread vector,
Peter> the second 8 bytes a pointer to the per-thread
Peter> thread-library-private data (for linuxthreads, it points to a
Peter> _pthread_descr)
Correct.
Peter> So is the idea to extend the TCB (in contravention of the
Peter> current ABI), or should this code have an extra level of
Peter> indirection, to get at the sysinfo field from the
Peter> library-specific structure?
The ABI only regulates positive offsets. The current glibc stores the
actual (p-)thread-control block _below_ the thread-pointer. I have a
glibc prototype which stores the sysinfo pointer at offset -8. Seems
to work fine so far (see
http://sources.redhat.com/ml/libc-hacker/2003-01/msg00118.html).
BTW: I forgot that "r9" is used by some syscalls (e.g., pipe()) to
return a second value, so we can't use it in the syscall stub to
preserve ar.pfs. I changed the stub to use "r11" instead (which
should be safe) and, while doing that, also added the necessary unwind
directives. So the stub now stands at:
REALLY_new_syscall_stub:
.prologue
adds r2 = SYSINFO_OFF, r13;;
ld8 r2 = [r2]
.save ar.pfs, r11
mov r11 = ar.pfs;;
.body
mov r15 = SYSCALL_NR
mov b7 = r2
br.call.sptk.many b6 = b7;;
cmp.eq p6,p0 = -1, r10
.restore sp
mov ar.pfs = r11
(p6) br.cond.spnt.few syscall_error
br.ret.sptk.many rp;;
I should have a kernel patch out soon (perhaps tonight) which will add
fsys-mode (light-weight system call) support to the kernel. (Only for
getpid at the moment; I mainly care about getting the infrastructure
in place, we can add lightweight syscall handlers over time.)
--david
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-01-15 1:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-01-08 18:32 [Linux-ia64] Re: [RFC] proposed change for syscall stub David Mosberger
2003-01-15 0:53 ` Peter Chubb
2003-01-15 1:11 ` David Mosberger [this message]
2003-01-15 1:14 ` Ulrich Drepper
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=marc-linux-ia64-105590709805675@msgid-missing \
--to=davidm@napali.hpl.hp.com \
--cc=linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org \
/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.