Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 7 Jun 2016 00:43:36 +0200 | From | Oleg Nesterov <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 4/6] x86/coredump: use core regs, rather that TIF_IA32 flag |
| |
On 06/06, Oleg Nesterov wrote: > > On 06/01, Dmitry Safonov wrote: > > > > static int fill_thread_core_info(struct elf_thread_core_info *t, > > const struct user_regset_view *view, > > - long signr, size_t *total) > > + long signr, size_t *total, > > + struct pt_regs *regs __maybe_unused) > > { > > unsigned int i; > > > > @@ -1652,11 +1653,11 @@ static int fill_thread_core_info(struct elf_thread_core_info *t, > > */ > > fill_prstatus(&t->prstatus, t->task, signr); > > (void) view->regsets[0].get(t->task, &view->regsets[0], > > - 0, PR_REG_SIZE(t->prstatus.pr_reg), > > + 0, PR_REG_SIZE(t->prstatus.pr_reg, regs), > > Hmm. I don't understand this... Note that this "regs" argument has nothing > to do with t->task if the process is multithreaded, > > > @@ -1772,7 +1773,8 @@ static int fill_note_info(struct elfhdr *elf, int phdrs, > > * Now fill in each thread's information. > > */ > > for (t = info->thread; t != NULL; t = t->next) > > - if (!fill_thread_core_info(t, view, siginfo->si_signo, &info->size)) > > + if (!fill_thread_core_info(t, view, siginfo->si_signo, > > + &info->size, regs)) > > fill_note_info(..., args) is called with args = task_pt_regs(dumper_thread).
forgot to mention... yes, this matches the fact we use a single "view" for all threads, and we get it via task_user_regset_view(dump_task).
But this change (imo) adds even more confusion, and without the next patch the logic looks "obviously wrong", becauase PR_REG_SIZE/etc look at dumper_thread->cs while task_user_regset_view() checks thread flags.
Anyway I fail to understand these macros... Say, PR_REG_SIZE(S). Can't we kill it and use regsets[0].n * regsets[0].size instead ? These numbers should match whatever we do, if we call ->get().
Oleg.
| |