From: "Jan Beulich" <jbeulich@novell.com>
To: "Ingo Molnar" <mingo@elte.hu>, "Andi Kleen" <andi@firstfloor.org>
Cc: "the arch/x86 maintainers" <x86@kernel.org>, <tglx@linutronix.de>,
<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <hpa@zytor.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86-64: remove unnecessary ptregs call stubs
Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2008 15:32:22 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <485A8A16.76E4.0078.0@novell.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <485A5606.6080600@firstfloor.org>
>>> Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org> 19.06.08 14:50 >>>
>Ingo Molnar wrote:
>> * Jan Beulich <jbeulich@novell.com> wrote:
>>
>>> A few of the ptregs call stubs are superfluous these days - the called
>>> functions don't have a trailing 'struct pt_regs *' parameter anymore.
>>
>> applied to tip/x86/cleanups - thanks Jan.
>
>Just want to point out that not having a pt_regs * argument is not necessarily
>sufficient for not needing a ptregs stub. Some code also accesses ptregs directly
>through the stack top from get_thread_info() and might assume a full one. That said I *think*
>it's ok for sigsuspend et.al. as in Jan's patch, but I haven't audited the complete code paths
>in question that they never do that.
>
>Would be good to clarify that in the commit log.
Looking at both the source and disassembly of sys_rt_sigsuspend() and
sys32_sigsuspend(), I cannot see anything pt_regs related. All these
functions call are copy_from_user(), spin_lock_irq(), recalc_sigpending(),
and schedule(), and besides that they just update some global and task
state.
Jan
prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-06-19 14:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-06-18 11:42 Jan Beulich
2008-06-19 12:25 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-06-19 12:50 ` Andi Kleen
2008-06-19 14:32 ` Jan Beulich [this message]
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=485A8A16.76E4.0078.0@novell.com \
--to=jbeulich@novell.com \
--cc=andi@firstfloor.org \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--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®