From: Andi Kleen <ak@muc.de>
To: "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>
Cc: torvalds@osdl.org, akpm@osdl.org, anton@samba.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, jk@blackdown.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ppc64: Fix PER_LINUX32 behaviour
Date: Sat, 11 Jun 2005 13:24:50 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <m1slzpcf0d.fsf@muc.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20050608.161633.55509444.davem@davemloft.net> (David S. Miller's message of "Wed, 08 Jun 2005 16:16:33 -0700 (PDT)")
"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net> writes:
> From: Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>
> Date: Thu, 9 Jun 2005 09:12:16 +1000
>
>> There is still a point of difference between ppc64 and x86_64: on
>> ppc64 (and on sparc64), if the personality is PER_LINUX32, the
>> personality(0xffffffffUL) system call returns PER_LINUX, and attempts
>> to set the personality to PER_LINUX don't change the personality
>> (i.e. it stays set to PER_LINUX32), for both 32-bit and 64-bit
>> processes. On x86_64 this is true for 32-bit processes but not for
>> 64-bit processes AFAICT. Does anyone know why we do this at all, and
>> whether doing it for 64-bit processes makes sense?
5A>
> We do this because, at least when this code was written,
> glibc would do a personality(PER_LINUX) call (either via
> the dynamic linker or via some other libc startup code)
> and this would undo the PER_LINUX32 setting.
>
> Therefore, it makes sense to do this for all cases, not
> just for 32-bit processes. The x86_64 code ought to be
> fixed, I think.
I have never seen a report of such a case (glibc undoing linux32).
Do you have details?
But I agree 64bit should be consistent to 32bit. Will fix.
-Andi
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-06-11 11:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-06-08 11:59 [PATCH] ppc64: Fix PER_LINUX32 behaviour Paul Mackerras
2005-06-08 17:24 ` Linus Torvalds
2005-06-08 18:49 ` Arnd Bergmann
2005-06-08 19:19 ` David S. Miller
2005-06-08 20:45 ` Olaf Hering
2005-06-08 20:45 ` Andreas Schwab
2005-06-08 20:54 ` Juergen Kreileder
2005-06-08 22:40 ` Andreas Schwab
2005-06-09 7:02 ` Juergen Kreileder
2005-06-08 23:12 ` Paul Mackerras
2005-06-08 23:16 ` David S. Miller
2005-06-11 11:24 ` Andi Kleen [this message]
2005-06-08 23:28 ` Linus Torvalds
2005-06-08 23:12 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
[not found] <20050608.121950.104038734.davem@davemloft.net.suse.lists.linux.kernel>
2005-06-08 20:50 ` Marcus Meissner
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=m1slzpcf0d.fsf@muc.de \
--to=ak@muc.de \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=anton@samba.org \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=jk@blackdown.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=torvalds@osdl.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