From: Stefani Seibold <stefani@seibold.net>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Cc: linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Americo Wang <xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] update fix X86_64 procfs provide stack information for threads
Date: Tue, 03 Nov 2009 10:06:24 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1257239184.4889.15.camel@wall-e> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20091103082843.GA27676@elte.hu>
Am Dienstag, den 03.11.2009, 09:28 +0100 schrieb Ingo Molnar:
> > --- linux-2.6.32-rc5/arch/x86/include/asm/processor.h 2009-10-16 02:41:50.000000000 +0200
> > +++ linux-2.6.32-rc5.new/arch/x86/include/asm/processor.h 2009-11-02 10:39:47.177909657 +0100
> > @@ -1000,7 +1001,13 @@
> > #define thread_saved_pc(t) (*(unsigned long *)((t)->thread.sp - 8))
> >
> > #define task_pt_regs(tsk) ((struct pt_regs *)(tsk)->thread.sp0 - 1)
> > -#define KSTK_ESP(tsk) -1 /* sorry. doesn't work for syscall. */
> > +
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_IA32_EMULATION
> > +extern unsigned long KSTK_ESP(struct task_struct *task);
> > +#else
> > +#define KSTK_ESP(task) ((task)->thread.usersp)
> > +#endif
> > +
> > #endif /* CONFIG_X86_64 */
> >
> > extern void start_thread(struct pt_regs *regs, unsigned long new_ip,
> > --- linux-2.6.32-rc5/arch/x86/kernel/process_64.c 2009-10-16 02:41:50.000000000 +0200
> > +++ linux-2.6.32-rc5.new/arch/x86/kernel/process_64.c 2009-11-02 10:48:23.614936810 +0100
> > @@ -664,3 +669,11 @@
> > return do_arch_prctl(current, code, addr);
> > }
> >
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_IA32_EMULATION
> > +unsigned long KSTK_ESP(struct task_struct *task)
> > +{
> > + return (test_tsk_thread_flag(task, TIF_IA32)) ? \
> > + (task_pt_regs(task)->sp) : \
> > + ((task)->thread.usersp);
> > +}
> > +#endif
>
> That's quite ugly. The KSTK_ESP() function should be unconditional and
> the #ifdef should be eliminated. If CONFIG_IA32_EMULATION is turned off
> (whichis rare) then TIF_IA32 wont be set so the function should work
> fine.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Ingo
Hi Ingo,
come on, thats not fair. This would be not the only piece of ugly code
in the x86_64 implementation. It is much better than the previous hack
where KSTK_ESP always returns a wrong hard coded value. That is really
ugly!!!!
It took me 6 hours to analyze the x64_64 code, most of them written in
assembler. I think it is a first solution, which makes the procfs stack
information work on this architecture and that was the goal.
I will remove the #ifdef's and repost the patch. Please accept this
patch, which make the KSTP_ESP thing on x86_64 better as before.
I am not a x64_64 bit hacker, i have not the knowledge to make a perfect
solution for this architecture. Also i am not a full time kernel hacker,
i have customers who wait for their projects.
Greeting,
Stefani
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-11-03 9:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-11-03 7:31 [PATCH] update fix X86_64 procfs provide stack information for threads Stefani Seibold
2009-11-03 8:28 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-11-03 9:06 ` Stefani Seibold [this message]
2009-11-03 18:16 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-11-05 8:19 ` [PATCH] RFC x86_64 more accurate KSTK_ESP implementation Stefani Seibold
2009-11-05 11:08 ` Andi Kleen
2009-11-05 12:11 ` Stefani Seibold
2009-11-08 11:35 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-11-08 12:51 ` Stefani Seibold
2009-11-08 12:55 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-11-08 14:00 ` Stefani Seibold
2009-11-08 16:34 ` H. Peter Anvin
2009-11-08 19:37 ` Andi Kleen
2009-11-05 13:02 ` [PATCH] fix /proc/<pid>/stat stack pointer for kernel threads Stefani Seibold
2009-11-13 8:01 ` [tip:x86/urgent] fs: " Stefani Seibold
2009-11-04 11:17 ` [PATCH] update fix X86_64 procfs provide stack information for threads Andi Kleen
2009-11-04 11:50 ` Stefani Seibold
2009-11-04 12:00 ` Andi Kleen
2009-11-04 12:22 ` Stefani Seibold
2009-11-04 15:42 ` Stefani Seibold
2009-11-04 22:21 ` Stefani Seibold
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=1257239184.4889.15.camel@wall-e \
--to=stefani@seibold.net \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com \
/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