From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
David Holmes - Sun Microsystems <David.Holmes@Sun.COM>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fix for futex_wait signal stack corruption
Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2007 14:43:29 -0800 (PST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.0.9999.0712041436100.13796@woody.linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20071204213924.GA14915@goodmis.org>
On Tue, 4 Dec 2007, Steven Rostedt wrote:
>
> Seems that arg3 is not used here and since the timer is 64 bits, we can
> store the bottom 32 bits in arg2 and the top in arg3 (this will work for
> both 32 and 64 bit archs).
Yes. That should work fine.
The restart logic sometimes results in odd calling conventions, and quite
frankly, we could just change how "restart_block" looks too. There is
nothing that says that it has to be
unsigned long arg0, arg1, arg2, arg3
and that particular layout was just picked on a whim. The only issue is:
- we don't want the restart block to be *too* large, since it's part of
the thread info.
- but we need to have enough room for all the system calls that want to
use the restart block, and preferably in a reasonable format.
So far, using "unsigned long" has been good enough, in that it's big
enough for a pointer and all normal arguments, but if something really
deeply wants another format or a guaranteed 64-bit word regardless of
architecture, we could make one or more of the arguments be "u64" instead.
But in this case, since there is already unused argument space, I think
that doing the "32 high bits + 32 low bits" is probably the best option.
Linus
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-12-04 22:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-12-04 20:57 Steven Rostedt
2007-12-04 21:09 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-12-04 21:39 ` Steven Rostedt
2007-12-04 22:43 ` Linus Torvalds [this message]
2007-12-05 1:23 ` Steven Rostedt
2007-12-05 1:46 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-12-05 3:17 ` [PATCH -v2] " Steven Rostedt
2007-12-05 3:41 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-12-05 3:47 ` Randy Dunlap
2007-12-05 3:53 ` Steven Rostedt
2007-12-05 5:33 ` David Holmes - Sun Microsystems
2007-12-05 6:06 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-12-05 6:14 ` David Holmes - Sun Microsystems
2007-12-05 5:54 ` Thomas Gleixner
2007-12-05 10:31 ` Ingo Molnar
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=alpine.LFD.0.9999.0712041436100.13796@woody.linux-foundation.org \
--to=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=David.Holmes@Sun.COM \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/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®