lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2013]   [Jan]   [20]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Date
SubjectRe: Issues with "x86, um: switch to generic fork/vfork/clone" commit
On Sat, Jan 19, 2013 at 7:12 PM, Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk> wrote:
>
> OK... I think I understand what's going on. We need asmlinkage_protect
> in sys_clone() ;-/ For what it's worth, I really wonder if we ought to
> treat that as syscall wrappers - i.e. have SYSCALL_DEFINEx on i386 add
> a wrapper that would do asmlinkage_protect itself. IMO it's the same kind
> of thing as argument normalization handled by syscall wrappers - we make
> sure that C function plays well with what asm glue is doing and expecting.

Actually, I think we should do it *unconditionally* in the syscall wrappers.

It's up to the architecture code to make asmlinkage_protect() be a
no-op or not, depending on how it does things. Right now I think only
x86 actually defines it, although I suspect there might be others that
should (anybody who passes arguments on the stack and also uses the
stack for save-area).

But in the meantime, I guess I should just take the do_fork() one. Can
I get a sign-off and a changelog?

Linus


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2013-01-20 22:21    [W:0.138 / U:0.772 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site