From: Alexander van Heukelum <heukelum@fastmail.fm>
To: Denys Vlasenko <vda.linux@googlemail.com>
Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>, X86 ML <x86@kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de>,
Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 2/4] x86_64: embrace KERNEL_STACK_OFFSET
Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2015 17:29:14 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1421857754.173957.216801721.380D3A16@webmail.messagingengine.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAK1hOcMgrpw5+Uz+5U25Xq_1fJNTGc4PUtw+YzGGYBZ-YKaJew@mail.gmail.com>
On Wed, Jan 21, 2015, at 14:44, Denys Vlasenko wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 18, 2015 at 12:45 PM, Alexander van Heukelum
> <heukelum@fastmail.fm> wrote:
> > KERNEL_STACK_OFFSET is the offset from the top of the kernel stack
> > page to the value of the kernel_stack percpu variable. This patch
> > changes KERNEL_STACK_OFFSET to configure a reserved space of 16
> > bytes above the user ptregs frame. KERNEL_STACK_OFFSET must be
> > set to a multiple of 16 bytes due to the automatic stack alignment
> > of interrupts, traps, and exceptions on x86_64.
>
> I propose to set kernel_stack percpu variable to point
> to the top of kernel stack (obvious, isn't it?)
> and eliminate KERNEL_STACK_OFFSET altogether.
By "top of kernel stack", do you mean the page boundary or the
top of struct pt_regs on the kernel stack? (is it really that obvious?)
I think Borislav did the latter for x86_64 in his patchset.
Eliminating KERNEL_STACK_OFFSET was what I did in my first
attempt, and I broke i386 by not thinking through what x86 common
code was really doing :).
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-01-21 16:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-01-18 11:45 [PATCHv2 0/4] x86, entry: some cleanup and simplification Alexander van Heukelum
2015-01-18 11:45 ` [PATCHv2 1/4] x86_64: cleanup THREAD_INFO(reg,offset) macro Alexander van Heukelum
2015-01-21 13:40 ` Denys Vlasenko
2015-01-21 16:20 ` Alexander van Heukelum
2015-01-21 18:04 ` Borislav Petkov
2015-01-21 18:48 ` Alexander van Heukelum
2015-01-18 11:45 ` [PATCHv2 2/4] x86_64: embrace KERNEL_STACK_OFFSET Alexander van Heukelum
2015-01-21 13:44 ` Denys Vlasenko
2015-01-21 16:29 ` Alexander van Heukelum [this message]
2015-01-23 0:53 ` Denys Vlasenko
2015-01-18 11:45 ` [PATCHv2 3/4] i386: clean up KERNEL_STACK_OFFSET Alexander van Heukelum
2015-01-18 11:45 ` [PATCHv2 4/4] x86_64, entry: Create IRET-compatible stack frame at syscall entry Alexander van Heukelum
2015-01-18 16:38 ` Andy Lutomirski
2015-01-18 17:22 ` Alexander van Heukelum
2015-01-18 12:05 ` [PATCHv2 0/4] x86, entry: some cleanup and simplification Borislav Petkov
2015-01-18 15:47 ` Alexander van Heukelum
2015-01-21 13:26 ` Denys Vlasenko
2015-01-21 15:51 ` Alexander van Heukelum
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1421857754.173957.216801721.380D3A16@webmail.messagingengine.com \
--to=heukelum@fastmail.fm \
--cc=bp@suse.de \
--cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=luto@amacapital.net \
--cc=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=riel@redhat.com \
--cc=vda.linux@googlemail.com \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®