[lkml]   [2009]   [Oct]   [13]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [GIT PULL] x86: unify sys_iopl
On 10/13/2009 09:53 AM, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
> On 10/13/09 09:24, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>> First of all, the unification looks good.
>> As far as .32 is concerned... this *is* a bug even if this is only for
>> paravirt, and given the small amount of code I am personally OK with
>> taking the whole patch for .32.
>> However, the patch is not complete! The patch incidentally eliminates
>> the need to have assembly stubs for sys_iopl, and those assembly stubs
>> should be removed. I have a patch for that currently test building.
> I wasn't sure whether task_pt_regs() needed the full register set to be
> saved to correctly return rflags (that is, does PTREGSCALL change the
> shape of the stack, or just the contents?).

Erk, I was right but still wrong... it isn't safe to modify the partial
pt_regs because of the magic sync stuff that goes on in entry_64.S.

I have to say the entry_64.S stuff gives me a headache in the extreme.
It really can't be the sanest way to do this stuff.

/me makes a mental note to try to work through this code at some point.


H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center
I work for Intel. I don't speak on their behalf.

 \ /
  Last update: 2009-10-13 23:41    [W:0.070 / U:1.460 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site