Messages in this thread Patch in this message | | | Date | Fri, 24 Oct 2008 13:37:24 +0200 | From | Ingo Molnar <> | Subject | Re: [GIT PULL] s390 updates for 2.6.28-rc1 |
| |
* Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com> wrote:
> The s390 vdso preparation patch "arch_setup_additional_pages argument" > touches other architectures (x86, sh and powerpc): > > arch_setup_additional_pages currently gets two arguments, the binary > format descripton and an indication if the process uses an executable > stack or not. The second argument is not used by anybody, it could be > removed without replacement.
hm, this is the first time i've seen this change, and it looks a bit weird:
--- a/arch/x86/include/asm/elf.h +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/elf.h @@ -325,7 +325,7 @@ struct linux_binprm;
#define ARCH_HAS_SETUP_ADDITIONAL_PAGES 1 extern int arch_setup_additional_pages(struct linux_binprm *bprm, - int executable_stack); + int uses_interp);
why didnt you just add a new uses_interp argument?
executable_stack is passed in to potentially enable architectures to be aware of how conservative/legacy the address-space of the binary is - whether to randomize the vdso, etc. exec-shield used to take advantage of that.
But there seems to be no in-tree use of that (and if one arises it can just add back that parameter), and i dont want to stand in the way of your pull request either, so for the x86 bits: Acked-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Ingo
| |