Received: by 2002:a05:6a10:206:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id 6csp28749pxj; Wed, 16 Jun 2021 19:21:02 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJypw5mvvzlKs1xVNGlCOpND22SYWcxDdVI5PF3xjsseUvPALUNoVXuMkKP/78vez3LYX4uP X-Received: by 2002:a02:a30d:: with SMTP id q13mr2133597jai.101.1623896461862; Wed, 16 Jun 2021 19:21:01 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1623896461; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=WUn274XhFjcxB9FVJUPk3g+kqDE7RYKHxih+picpMy29k6XKFasdCHbSe4ng1jJ68y htJ0kMv9CcFmBhayz8ILIlD3DOJHPLAcDMK+zjh6xtxUcbJgd0gdtEa0TYcrE+0iDjGt d+3hPZiZp3UyOaC8IzNmnbjFtfFMRlg7EuzL+si638KD0LEFGUYd1c0MTw6zWX4BbxXK OFZtUaTzyjCl8WYn0cqcA+kxLl83o36CurdqMb0D/ulfkqHd/qaAHYeobVZXjkL16pzq 8Ejl/oX4dnTerVgrMwtqDCPT+CrW1UGUHmMd3iN5OZjN1Di9VvD33LyaFlEtNv4tAaDs PPyA== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:subject:mime-version:user-agent:message-id :in-reply-to:date:references:cc:to:from; bh=bTpeoxlZaKO1OBmzPI9dF/gB+d3SgV0Dk0osTQOk5gE=; b=PH2Q1KiY3EXby24MWH7l4WUBQQbsG+Efgir3B+2MAwldXnjR5UVjHyYEGxzGXlPgWu ucMFEgPuyMuszQJRYsqcA0LjlNFLafOzsAuIHzQ8wYwzq40NHY65QJfPGlLXs+KShLtV c7fx404HExdmEnAxgvPvfYPfFFtw9bvz60iYJROhDylhS67bfEGs+XXo0qbHKWL0O7hF AtlKd75yvr45r3IsDzfcbGfGyRadhjiu4Mo9igirR9phdXvGS/eh52RjPADGA81UztxC GJisZdgFK/pTHSzCcrAEiN+R6nvthdZ0CJnna4eKynMKG1HhWUOCyAnRxdThdwQ60Puj j8Og== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=xmission.com Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [23.128.96.18]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id q4si4506192jas.57.2021.06.16.19.20.50; Wed, 16 Jun 2021 19:21:01 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=xmission.com Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S233674AbhFPUto (ORCPT + 99 others); Wed, 16 Jun 2021 16:49:44 -0400 Received: from out02.mta.xmission.com ([166.70.13.232]:59024 "EHLO out02.mta.xmission.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S233632AbhFPUtn (ORCPT ); Wed, 16 Jun 2021 16:49:43 -0400 Received: from in01.mta.xmission.com ([166.70.13.51]) by out02.mta.xmission.com with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.93) (envelope-from ) id 1ltcRk-000xec-Iv; Wed, 16 Jun 2021 14:47:36 -0600 Received: from ip68-227-160-95.om.om.cox.net ([68.227.160.95] helo=email.xmission.com) by in01.mta.xmission.com with esmtpsa (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.93) (envelope-from ) id 1ltcRj-00HATZ-LL; Wed, 16 Jun 2021 14:47:36 -0600 From: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) To: Al Viro Cc: Linus Torvalds , Michael Schmitz , linux-arch , Jens Axboe , Oleg Nesterov , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Richard Henderson , Ivan Kokshaysky , Matt Turner , alpha , Geert Uytterhoeven , linux-m68k , Arnd Bergmann , Ley Foon Tan , Tejun Heo , Kees Cook References: <6e47eff8-d0a4-8390-1222-e975bfbf3a65@gmail.com> <924ec53c-2fd9-2e1c-bbb1-3fda49809be4@gmail.com> <87eed4v2dc.fsf@disp2133> <5929e116-fa61-b211-342a-c706dcb834ca@gmail.com> <87fsxjorgs.fsf@disp2133> <87zgvqor7d.fsf_-_@disp2133> <87mtrpg47k.fsf@disp2133> <87pmwlek8d.fsf_-_@disp2133> <87eed1ek31.fsf_-_@disp2133> Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2021 15:47:28 -0500 In-Reply-To: (Al Viro's message of "Wed, 16 Jun 2021 20:25:35 +0000") Message-ID: <87zgvp8rkv.fsf@disp2133> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-XM-SPF: eid=1ltcRj-00HATZ-LL;;;mid=<87zgvp8rkv.fsf@disp2133>;;;hst=in01.mta.xmission.com;;;ip=68.227.160.95;;;frm=ebiederm@xmission.com;;;spf=neutral X-XM-AID: U2FsdGVkX195d1760MtpbygweJjBXaa4JV6iKT/cpgY= X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 68.227.160.95 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: ebiederm@xmission.com X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on sa04.xmission.com X-Spam-Level: ** X-Spam-Status: No, score=2.0 required=8.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,BAYES_50, DCC_CHECK_NEGATIVE,T_TM2_M_HEADER_IN_MSG,T_TooManySym_01,XMNoVowels, XMSubLong autolearn=disabled version=3.4.2 X-Spam-Report: * -1.0 ALL_TRUSTED Passed through trusted hosts only via SMTP * 0.8 BAYES_50 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 40 to 60% * [score: 0.5000] * 0.7 XMSubLong Long Subject * 1.5 XMNoVowels Alpha-numberic number with no vowels * 0.0 T_TM2_M_HEADER_IN_MSG BODY: No description available. * -0.0 DCC_CHECK_NEGATIVE Not listed in DCC * [sa04 1397; Body=1 Fuz1=1 Fuz2=1] * 0.0 T_TooManySym_01 4+ unique symbols in subject X-Spam-DCC: XMission; sa04 1397; Body=1 Fuz1=1 Fuz2=1 X-Spam-Combo: **;Al Viro X-Spam-Relay-Country: X-Spam-Timing: total 288 ms - load_scoreonly_sql: 0.08 (0.0%), signal_user_changed: 10 (3.6%), b_tie_ro: 9 (3.1%), parse: 0.82 (0.3%), extract_message_metadata: 12 (4.2%), get_uri_detail_list: 0.92 (0.3%), tests_pri_-1000: 13 (4.6%), tests_pri_-950: 1.08 (0.4%), tests_pri_-900: 0.89 (0.3%), tests_pri_-90: 54 (18.9%), check_bayes: 53 (18.5%), b_tokenize: 6 (2.0%), b_tok_get_all: 6 (2.2%), b_comp_prob: 1.95 (0.7%), b_tok_touch_all: 36 (12.6%), b_finish: 0.79 (0.3%), tests_pri_0: 184 (63.7%), check_dkim_signature: 0.55 (0.2%), check_dkim_adsp: 2.9 (1.0%), poll_dns_idle: 0.55 (0.2%), tests_pri_10: 1.75 (0.6%), tests_pri_500: 7 (2.4%), rewrite_mail: 0.00 (0.0%) Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] alpha/ptrace: Add missing switch_stack frames X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Sat, 08 Feb 2020 21:53:50 +0000) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on in01.mta.xmission.com) Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Al Viro writes: > On Wed, Jun 16, 2021 at 01:32:50PM -0500, Eric W. Biederman wrote: > >> -.macro fork_like name >> +.macro allregs name >> .align 4 >> .globl alpha_\name >> .ent alpha_\name >> + .cfi_startproc >> alpha_\name: >> .prologue 0 >> - bsr $1, do_switch_stack >> + SAVE_SWITCH_STACK >> jsr $26, sys_\name >> - ldq $26, 56($sp) >> - lda $sp, SWITCH_STACK_SIZE($sp) >> + RESTORE_SWITCH_STACK > > No. You've just added one hell of an overhead to fork(2), > for no reason whatsoever. sys_fork() et.al. does *NOT* modify the > callee-saved registers; it's plain C. So this change is complete > BS. Fork already saves the registers, all I did was restore them. Which makes a debugger that modifies them in PTRACE_EVENT_{FORK,VFORK,CLONE,VFORK_DONE} work. >> +allregs exit >> +allregs exit_group > > Details, please - what exactly makes exit(2) different from > e.g. open(2)? PTRACE_EVENT_EXIT. Eric