lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2011]   [Sep]   [27]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH v5 3.1.0-rc4-tip 13/26] x86: define a x86 specific exception notifier.
From
Date
On Mon, 2011-09-26 at 21:22 +0530, Srikar Dronamraju wrote:
> * Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> [2011-09-26 16:19:51]:
>
> > On Tue, 2011-09-20 at 17:32 +0530, Srikar Dronamraju wrote:
> > > @@ -820,6 +821,19 @@ do_notify_resume(struct pt_regs *regs, void *unused, __u32 thread_info_flags)
> > > mce_notify_process();
> > > #endif /* CONFIG_X86_64 && CONFIG_X86_MCE */
> > >
> > > + if (thread_info_flags & _TIF_UPROBE) {
> > > + clear_thread_flag(TIF_UPROBE);
> > > +#ifdef CONFIG_X86_32
> > > + /*
> > > + * On x86_32, do_notify_resume() gets called with
> > > + * interrupts disabled. Hence enable interrupts if they
> > > + * are still disabled.
> > > + */
> > > + local_irq_enable();
> > > +#endif
> > > + uprobe_notify_resume(regs);
> > > + }
> > > +
> > > /* deal with pending signal delivery */
> > > if (thread_info_flags & _TIF_SIGPENDING)
> > > do_signal(regs);
> >
> > It would be good to remove this difference between i386 and x86_64.
>
>
> I think, we have already discussed this. I tried getting to know why we
> have this difference in behaviour. However I havent been able to find
> the answer.
>
> If you can get somebody to answer this, I would be happy to modify as
> required.

The Changelog failed to mention this. Afaict there really is no reason
other than that touching entry_32.S is a pain.


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2011-09-27 13:51    [W:0.071 / U:4.328 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site