Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Fri, 18 Oct 2002 23:41:03 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Fri, 18 Oct 2002 23:41:03 -0400 Received: from mnh-1-10.mv.com ([207.22.10.42]:6919 "EHLO ccure.karaya.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Fri, 18 Oct 2002 23:41:03 -0400 Message-Id: <200210190450.XAA06161@ccure.karaya.com> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.0.2 To: Andi Kleen Cc: john stultz , Linus Torvalds , andrea , lkml , george anzinger , Stephen Hemminger Subject: Re: [PATCH] linux-2.5.43_vsyscall_A0 In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sat, 19 Oct 2002 05:10:02 +0200." <20021019031002.GA16404@averell> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Fri, 18 Oct 2002 23:49:59 -0500 From: Jeff Dike Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1061 Lines: 26 ak@muc.de said: > Guess you'll have some problems then with UML on x86-64, which always > uses vgettimeofday. But it's only used for gettimeofday() currently, > perhaps it's not that bad when the UML child runs with the host's > time. It's not horrible, but it's still broken. There are people who depend on UML being able to keep its own time separately from the host. > I guess it would be possible to add some support for UML to map own > code over the vsyscall reserved locations. UML would need to use the > syscalls then. But it'll be likely ugly. Yeah, it would be. My preferred solution would be for libc to ask the kernel where the vsyscall area is. That's reasonably clean and virtualizable. Andrea doesn't like it because it adds a few instructions to the vsyscall address calculation. Jeff - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/