lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2006]   [Aug]   [22]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] paravirt.h
Zachary Amsden wrote:

> I've already implemented the locking and repatching bits for VMI.


Incorrectly, I might add. The problem case for syscall patching is what
do you do if there are in-service system calls? The comparable problem
here is what if you interrupt code running in the old paravirt-ops, or
worse, a section of code that you repatch when you do the switch?

That is a really nasty problem. You need a synchronization primitive
which guarantees a flat stack, so you can't do it in the interrupt
handler as I have tried to do. I'll bang my head on it awhile. In the
meantime, were there ever any solutions to the syscall patching problem
that might lend me a clue as to what to do (or not to do, or impossible?).

Thanks,

Zach
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2006-08-22 21:31    [W:0.067 / U:0.028 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site