From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
To: Tejun Heo <htejun@gmail.com>
Cc: Brian Gerst <brgerst@gmail.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] x86: Pass in pt_regs pointer for syscalls that need it
Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2009 15:58:48 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090211145848.GC10525@elte.hu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4992E551.4060901@gmail.com>
* Tejun Heo <htejun@gmail.com> wrote:
> Tejun Heo wrote:
> >> I checked the disassembly of these functions and didn't see this
> >> happen on gcc 4.3.0.
> >
> > Well, tracking down why run_init_process() is returning 0 with
> > -fstack-protector wasn't much of fun. These breakages are very subtle
> > and if we're gonna pass in pointer to pt_regs anyway and thus can
> > guarantee such breakage can't happen at no additional cost, I think we
> > should do that even if it means slightly more argument fetching in a
> > few places.
>
> In addition, if we do that, we can remove the horrible
> asmlinkage_protect() thing altogether.
Agreed.
Ingo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-02-11 14:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 36+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-02-10 14:51 [PATCH 0/3] x86: Fix pt_regs passed by value Brian Gerst
2009-02-10 14:51 ` [PATCH 1/3] x86: Use pt_regs pointer in do_device_not_available() Brian Gerst
2009-02-11 7:43 ` Tejun Heo
2009-02-11 10:13 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-02-11 14:34 ` Brian Gerst
2009-02-11 14:42 ` Tejun Heo
2009-02-11 14:46 ` Brian Gerst
2009-02-11 14:53 ` Tejun Heo
2009-02-10 14:51 ` [PATCH 2/3] x86: Pass in pt_regs pointer for syscalls that need it Brian Gerst
2009-02-11 7:41 ` Tejun Heo
2009-02-11 10:18 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-02-11 14:14 ` Tejun Heo
2009-02-11 14:31 ` Brian Gerst
2009-02-11 14:41 ` Tejun Heo
2009-02-11 14:43 ` Tejun Heo
2009-02-11 14:48 ` Tejun Heo
2009-02-11 14:58 ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2009-02-11 14:59 ` Brian Gerst
2009-02-11 15:05 ` Tejun Heo
2009-02-11 15:10 ` Brian Gerst
2009-02-11 15:14 ` Tejun Heo
2009-02-11 15:59 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-02-12 1:12 ` Tejun Heo
2009-02-11 15:01 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-02-11 17:52 ` H. Peter Anvin
2009-02-11 18:27 ` Brian Gerst
2009-02-11 19:50 ` H. Peter Anvin
2009-02-11 19:57 ` Brian Gerst
2009-02-11 20:00 ` H. Peter Anvin
2009-02-11 21:43 ` [PATCH] x86: pass in pt_regs pointer for syscalls that need it (take 2) Brian Gerst
2009-02-11 21:50 ` H. Peter Anvin
2009-02-11 22:06 ` H. Peter Anvin
2009-02-12 11:02 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-02-10 14:51 ` [PATCH 3/3] x86: Drop -fno-stack-protector after pt_regs fixes Brian Gerst
2009-02-11 11:42 ` [PATCH 0/3] x86: Fix pt_regs passed by value Ingo Molnar
2009-02-11 14:15 ` Tejun Heo
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=20090211145848.GC10525@elte.hu \
--to=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=brgerst@gmail.com \
--cc=htejun@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@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