From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1030429AbXBZSoM (ORCPT ); Mon, 26 Feb 2007 13:44:12 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1030430AbXBZSoM (ORCPT ); Mon, 26 Feb 2007 13:44:12 -0500 Received: from rwcrmhc15.comcast.net ([204.127.192.85]:44294 "EHLO rwcrmhc15.comcast.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1030429AbXBZSoL (ORCPT ); Mon, 26 Feb 2007 13:44:11 -0500 X-Greylist: delayed 604 seconds by postgrey-1.27 at vger.kernel.org; Mon, 26 Feb 2007 13:44:11 EST Subject: x86_64 vdso patch status? From: Jim Houston Reply-To: jim.houston@comcast.net To: Andi Kleen Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Type: text/plain Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2007 13:33:49 -0500 Message-Id: <1172514829.7749.17.camel@x2.site> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.4.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi Andi, I tried playing with your vdso patch. I'm curious what magic is needed to make an application link with the vdso? You also mentioned that there are problems with newer tool chains. I think I'm seeing this problem when I build on an FC6 system. The vdso.so ends up using file offsets like 00100120 so it doesn't fit in a single page. This seems to be sensitive to the VDSO_PRELINK address. If I changes this address to 0xffffffffff800000 then the vdso.so looks correct. Is this change safe? Is it enough to change the VDSO_PRELINK define or are there other values which need to be kept in sync? Jim Houston - Concurrent Computer Corp.