From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Sat, 10 Nov 2001 00:53:49 +1100 From: David Gibson To: linuxppc-embedded@lists.linuxppc.org Subject: Re: 405 -- a little console help, part 2 Message-ID: <20011110005349.F3141@zax> References: <3BEA8A5D.50A75CE7@midrivers.com> <3BEAA8D3.51ADDCC8@mvista.com> <20011109114403.J27549@zax> <3BEBDCC9.62669CF1@midrivers.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <3BEBDCC9.62669CF1@midrivers.com> Sender: owner-linuxppc-embedded@lists.linuxppc.org List-Id: On Fri, Nov 09, 2001 at 06:40:25AM -0700, Mark Pilon wrote: > David Gibson wrote: > > > > Ah, I think I know why this might be - are you using the 2_4_devel > > tree? > > > > All static executables segfaulted before reaching main until very > > recently: the 4xx's MMU makes it possible to actually enforce the > > execute permission bit on pages. Since most processors don't allow > > this, however, there are heaps of bugs in userland (binutils etc.) > > where pages aren't marked executable that need to be. In this case > > there was instruction just before the got that wasn't marked > > executable. > > > > For now, at least, I've disabled enforcement of the page execute > > permissions, because there's just too much stuff that breaks with it > > on. > > What's the fix for this? It sounds like I want to un-do that change > enforcing page execute permissions -- David, could you give me > a spot to look and a suggested patch? anyone? I've checked the fix into the latest linuxppc_2_4_devel. Failing that, look in do_page_fault() in arch/ppc/mm/fault.c, look for a test against vma->flags & VM_EXEC, and remove it. -- David Gibson | For every complex problem there is a david@gibson.dropbear.id.au | solution which is simple, neat and | wrong. -- H.L. Mencken http://www.ozlabs.org/people/dgibson ** Sent via the linuxppc-embedded mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/