From: Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
To: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com>
Cc: Parisc List <linux-parisc@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: what's parisc execve_wrapper doing in the end?
Date: Thu, 4 Oct 2012 13:22:01 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20121004122201.GI23473@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1349344936.2706.10.camel@dabdike.int.hansenpartnership.com>
On Thu, Oct 04, 2012 at 11:02:16AM +0100, James Bottomley wrote:
> It's plausible. I just verified the theory that the branch is redundant
> by successfully booting with this patch applied.
Somewhat related question: does CONFIG_HPUX work at all? What we have there
is this:
mfctl %cr30,%r1
xor %r1,%r30,%r30 /* ye olde xor trick */
xor %r1,%r30,%r1
xor %r1,%r30,%r30
ldo TASK_SZ_ALGN+FRAME_SIZE(%r30),%r30 /* set up kernel stack */
followed by saving registers into &((struct task_struct *)cr30)->thread.regs.
cr30 contains something very different, though - struct thread_info *.
Had been that way since 2002 or so. And after we'd been finished with
syscall, we'll get to hpux_syscall_exit, tweak r22/r28 a bit and
sod off to syscall_exit. Which does
mfctl %cr30, %r1
LDREG TI_TASK(%r1),%r1
and eventually restores the values of registers saved in
&(struct task_struct)r1->thread.regs. Except that here the value of r1 is
((struct thread_info *)cr30)->task, not cr30 itself. Which matches what we
have in current.h (and do_fork(), etc.), but not what we'd done when we
entered the syscall. IOW, the values we restore will have nothing to do
with what we saved.
Unless I'm missing something really subtle, it looks like HPUX compat had
been very noticably broken since at least 2002. Comments?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-10-04 12:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <20121004045150.GH23473@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
2012-10-04 9:30 ` what's parisc execve_wrapper doing in the end? James Bottomley
2012-10-05 11:07 ` James Bottomley
2012-10-05 13:44 ` James Bottomley
2012-10-05 14:47 ` James Bottomley
2012-10-05 14:48 ` Al Viro
2012-10-05 14:55 ` James Bottomley
2012-10-05 19:21 ` Al Viro
2012-10-05 23:04 ` Al Viro
2012-10-08 11:28 ` James Bottomley
2012-10-09 9:55 ` James Bottomley
2012-10-10 4:26 ` Al Viro
2012-10-05 22:54 ` John David Anglin
2012-10-05 23:32 ` Al Viro
2012-10-06 0:15 ` John David Anglin
[not found] ` <20121004051359.GA24664@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
2012-10-04 10:02 ` James Bottomley
2012-10-04 12:22 ` Al Viro [this message]
2012-10-04 12:57 ` James Bottomley
2012-10-04 13:30 ` Carlos O'Donell
2012-10-04 14:07 ` Al Viro
2012-10-05 0:00 ` John David Anglin
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=20121004122201.GI23473@ZenIV.linux.org.uk \
--to=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
--cc=James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com \
--cc=linux-parisc@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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox