Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 29 Apr 2008 20:01:05 +0400 | From | Cyrill Gorcunov <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] x86: vm86 - hide X86_VM_MASK from userland programs v2 |
| |
[H. Peter Anvin - Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 08:46:09AM -0700] > Cyrill Gorcunov wrote: >> | | with this patch we have <asm/vm86.h> included only >> | if __i386__ defined *BUT* X86_VM_MASK is tried to be >> | used *without* __386__ being checked (as example - >> ptrace.h:user_mode_vm). >> | I'm not sure how to properly hanle this situation. But will take a look. >> | | So I suggest you drop my last patch (which moves X86_VM_MASK >> | into __KERNEL__ section) for a while. I'll recheck all >> | this stuff later (too busy now). >> | | - Cyrill - >> Thomas, could you take a look please - is my suspicious wrong? >> - Cyrill - > > X86_VM_MASK should be defined to zero on x86-64. Part of the reason for > this symbol is so we don't have to put #ifdef around its uses. > > -hpa >
Hi Peter,
yes, we already have X86_VM_MASK defined to 0 in vm86.h on 64bits cpu - the only question - why this file was not included in ptrace.h even the machine was 32bit cpu configured (according to Ingo's config). I've been suspecting that it's __i386__ who is responsible for that but I was wrong - it's just alias for CONFIG_X86_32. Interesting... ;) Need time to investigate. /And sorry Thomas, I was wrong about your commit/
- Cyrill -
| |