From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] alpha/ptrace: Add missing switch_stack frames Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2021 15:47:28 -0500 Message-ID: <87zgvp8rkv.fsf@disp2133> References: <6e47eff8-d0a4-8390-1222-e975bfbf3a65@gmail.com> <924ec53c-2fd9-2e1c-bbb1-3fda49809be4@gmail.com> <87eed4v2dc.fsf@disp2133> <5929e116-fa61-b211-342a-c706dcb834ca@gmail.com> <87fsxjorgs.fsf@disp2133> <87zgvqor7d.fsf_-_@disp2133> <87mtrpg47k.fsf@disp2133> <87pmwlek8d.fsf_-_@disp2133> <87eed1ek31.fsf_-_@disp2133> Mime-Version: 1.0 Return-path: In-Reply-To: (Al Viro's message of "Wed, 16 Jun 2021 20:25:35 +0000") List-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Al Viro Cc: Linus Torvalds , Michael Schmitz , linux-arch , Jens Axboe , Oleg Nesterov , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Richard Henderson , Ivan Kokshaysky , Matt Turner , alpha , Geert Uytterhoeven , linux-m68k , Arnd Bergmann , Ley Foon Tan , Tejun Heo , Kees Cook Al Viro writes: > On Wed, Jun 16, 2021 at 01:32:50PM -0500, Eric W. Biederman wrote: > >> -.macro fork_like name >> +.macro allregs name >> .align 4 >> .globl alpha_\name >> .ent alpha_\name >> + .cfi_startproc >> alpha_\name: >> .prologue 0 >> - bsr $1, do_switch_stack >> + SAVE_SWITCH_STACK >> jsr $26, sys_\name >> - ldq $26, 56($sp) >> - lda $sp, SWITCH_STACK_SIZE($sp) >> + RESTORE_SWITCH_STACK > > No. You've just added one hell of an overhead to fork(2), > for no reason whatsoever. sys_fork() et.al. does *NOT* modify the > callee-saved registers; it's plain C. So this change is complete > BS. Fork already saves the registers, all I did was restore them. Which makes a debugger that modifies them in PTRACE_EVENT_{FORK,VFORK,CLONE,VFORK_DONE} work. >> +allregs exit >> +allregs exit_group > > Details, please - what exactly makes exit(2) different from > e.g. open(2)? PTRACE_EVENT_EXIT. Eric