Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756311AbZLISSh (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 Dec 2009 13:18:37 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1755200AbZLISSe (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 Dec 2009 13:18:34 -0500 Received: from claw.goop.org ([74.207.240.146]:33032 "EHLO claw.goop.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755182AbZLISSd (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 Dec 2009 13:18:33 -0500 Message-ID: <4B1FE9FD.3030407@goop.org> Date: Wed, 09 Dec 2009 10:18:37 -0800 From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.1.5) Gecko/20091125 Fedora/3.0-3.12.rc1.fc12 Lightning/1.0pre Thunderbird/3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Linus Torvalds CC: Ingo Molnar , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Thomas Gleixner , "H. Peter Anvin" , Andrew Morton , Hugh Dickens Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] x86/paravirt for v2.6.33 References: <20091203210913.GA24351@elte.hu> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1620 Lines: 41 On 12/08/09 13:34, Linus Torvalds wrote: > I do _not_ want to add any more task_pt_regs() crap, please. > > Why? It's wrong for at least vm86 mode (and from kernel system calls). > Would the stack frame version work in these cases? > Maybe we can't get into system calls from vm86 mode, and the kernel > hopefully doesn't do those things anyway, but the point is, you chose the > wrong way to go. > iopl doesn't make much sense as a kernel-called syscall, unless the caller is intending to change the usermode iopl. In which case, won't task_pt_regs() do the right thing - by pointing to the saved usermode register set - vs modifying the ptregs the caller may pass in? iopl is also one of the special set of syscalls which get special handing in entry_*.S, so I don't think doing a direct call from within the kernel is ever sensible, and it should always be possible to make task_pt_regs return meaningful results. I agree with you that vm86 would be a problem if its possible to call iopl. > The old version that actually passed the stack frame was better. Why pick > the inferior version? > Mainly because it exposes the difference between the 32 and 64-bit ABIs, requiring separate code for each case; it seemed like an opportunity to remove the differences. Anyway, I'll post a patch to revert to the pt_regs-based version shortly. J -- 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/