Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 27 May 2011 13:59:14 +0200 | Subject | Re: [GIT pull] x86 vdso updates | From | richard -rw- weinberger <> |
| |
On Fri, May 27, 2011 at 1:36 PM, Andrew Lutomirski <luto@mit.edu> wrote: > On Fri, May 27, 2011 at 2:12 AM, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> wrote: >> >> * Andy Lutomirski <luto@mit.edu> wrote: >> >>> On 05/26/2011 02:50 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote: >>> > x86-64: Add time to vDSO >>> >>> And here's the glibc bug: >>> >>> http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12813 >>> >>> Let the deprecation of the vsyscall page begin :) >> >> Yeah :-) >> >> On a related note, now that these bits are upstream, what are your >> rough plans for doing the int81 vsyscall emulation patch? >> >> The int81 patch would actually be (much!) more important to the >> average Linux user than getting rid of the vsyscall from static >> binaries: the vsyscall is the last predictable executable address in >> PIE daemons with a dangerous SYSENTER instruction in it ... >> >> I'd actually consider accelerating it into v2.6.40. > > Working on it slowly. In principle I'm writing my thesis right now on > things that have very little to do with software :) > > My rough plans for the near-term stuff are: > > 1. Move vvars out of the vsyscall page. Otherwise we have at least > one predictable syscall instruction every 1<<16 seconds because the > time is executable. It's prettier that way, too. > > 2. Remove the vsyscall64 sysctl. That will reduce the number of > vsyscalls that require the kernel's help to one. (This is a bit > unfortunate for UML users, but I'm not sure what to do about that. > UML vgetcpu is already terminally broken.)
Can you please be a bit more precise on that? When there is anything I can do, let me know...
-- Thanks, //richard -- 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/
| |