From: Ian Kent <raven@themaw.net>
To: Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@openvz.org>
Cc: autofs mailing list <autofs@linux.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Konstantin Khlebnikov <khlebnikov@openvz.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] autofs4: fix 32-bit userspace vs 64-bit kernel communications
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2008 21:40:29 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1213191629.4994.61.camel@raven.themaw.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <484FD233.20602@openvz.org>
On Wed, 2008-06-11 at 17:25 +0400, Pavel Emelyanov wrote:
> > Does the test_thread_flag(TIF_IA32) macro only return true for a 32-bit
> > user-space process running within a 64-bit user space environment
> > (perhaps I can do away with the check in the autofs daemon, perhaps it
> > doesn't quite work correctly)?
>
> Hm... If we fix it in the user level that would also be OK, I
> suppose...
>
> > Oh .. so maybe the answer to my question is yes?
>
> It is - we check *only* for the process, that is to receive the
> packet.
Right, since the send is done in user context.
>
> > What about other arches offer 32-bit within a 64-bit environment (has
> > this been the case on sparc64 at some point)?
> > What about the compiler padding on these?
>
> We have no technical ability to check this. First I wanted to
> get your opinion about this particular fix for x86 machines.
>
> As far as sparc(64) and other 32-to-64 are concerned - I can
> start talking to their users/maintainers to check.
I investigated only x86_64 and sparc64 but that was a quite a while ago
now. My sparc machine doesn't even have a Linux install atm.
If we can find a general and consistent solution I'm happy to remove the
check from the daemon and cope with the bit of pain it might cause.
>
> > Don't get me wrong, I'm not against fixing this, in fact I'd like to,
> > but I'm concerned it may end up a bit of a can of worms.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-06-11 13:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-06-11 9:54 [PATCH] autofs4: fix 32-bit userspace vs 64-bit kernel communications Pavel Emelyanov
2008-06-11 12:32 ` Ian Kent
2008-06-11 12:47 ` Pavel Emelyanov
2008-06-11 13:08 ` Ian Kent
2008-06-11 13:15 ` Ian Kent
2008-06-11 13:25 ` Pavel Emelyanov
2008-06-11 13:40 ` Ian Kent [this message]
2008-06-11 14:29 ` Mikael Pettersson
2008-06-12 2:52 ` Ian Kent
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=1213191629.4994.61.camel@raven.themaw.net \
--to=raven@themaw.net \
--cc=autofs@linux.kernel.org \
--cc=khlebnikov@openvz.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=xemul@openvz.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