From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from sc8-sf-mx1-b.sourceforge.net ([10.3.1.91] helo=mail.sourceforge.net) by sc8-sf-list1-new.sourceforge.net with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HOMaB-00064d-UG for user-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net; Mon, 05 Mar 2007 15:27:08 -0800 Received: from smtp008.mail.ukl.yahoo.com ([217.12.11.62]) by mail.sourceforge.net with smtp (Exim 4.44) id 1HOMa8-0001nj-7l for user-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net; Mon, 05 Mar 2007 15:27:07 -0800 From: Blaisorblade Date: Tue, 6 Mar 2007 00:26:53 +0100 References: <20070131224504.GA7698@ccure.user-mode-linux.org> <200703060003.26856.blaisorblade@yahoo.it> <20070305231044.GB9525@ccure.user-mode-linux.org> In-Reply-To: <20070305231044.GB9525@ccure.user-mode-linux.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200703060026.53253.blaisorblade@yahoo.it> Subject: Re: [uml-devel] [PATCH] x86_64 32-bit ptrace mangles sixth system call argument List-Id: The user-mode Linux development list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: user-mode-linux-devel-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net Errors-To: user-mode-linux-devel-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net To: user-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Cc: Jeff Dike On Tuesday 06 March 2007 00:10, Jeff Dike wrote: > On Tue, Mar 06, 2007 at 12:03:26AM +0100, Blaisorblade wrote: > > > No, RCX corruption is different - that happens when a sysexit is done > > > from a system call where userspace wasn't prepared to save and restore > > > RCX. sigreturn is the best example. > > Hmm... we should finally fix that, at some point. Or... now that you > > explain it this way, it could even seem unfixable... is it? Or maybe > > sysreturn should become a syscall where the return must happen through > > the slow return path (iret), if that exists for x86_64. > This is fixed, and has been for a while. The fix was, as you suggest, > return through iret in this case. Also the 32bit emulation case? That would be interesting for SKAS with 64bit host and 32bit guest (which I haven't tested for a long time). Also this means that I could test the needed trivial fixes for 64 on 64 (like opening /proc/mm64, using PTRACE_EX_FAULTINFO which I introduced...). -- Inform me of my mistakes, so I can add them to my list! Paolo Giarrusso, aka Blaisorblade http://www.user-mode-linux.org/~blaisorblade Chiacchiera con i tuoi amici in tempo reale! http://it.yahoo.com/mail_it/foot/*http://it.messenger.yahoo.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys-and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV _______________________________________________ User-mode-linux-devel mailing list User-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/user-mode-linux-devel