Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932770Ab0BPKXi (ORCPT ); Tue, 16 Feb 2010 05:23:38 -0500 Received: from one.firstfloor.org ([213.235.205.2]:39968 "EHLO one.firstfloor.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932372Ab0BPKXh (ORCPT ); Tue, 16 Feb 2010 05:23:37 -0500 Date: Tue, 16 Feb 2010 11:23:32 +0100 From: Andi Kleen To: Oleg Nesterov Cc: Andi Kleen , "H. Peter Anvin" , Roland McGrath , Linus Torvalds , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: x86: get rid of the insane TIF_ABI_PENDING bit Message-ID: <20100216102332.GL21783@one.firstfloor.org> References: <20100215161752.GA19962@redhat.com> <4B799C3F.7010308@zytor.com> <20100215194123.96D49FC3@magilla.sf.frob.com> <4B79B202.5090006@zytor.com> <20100216101903.GA1057@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20100216101903.GA1057@redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.2i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1546 Lines: 39 On Tue, Feb 16, 2010 at 11:19:03AM +0100, Oleg Nesterov wrote: > On 02/15, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > > > > On 02/15/2010 11:41 AM, Roland McGrath wrote: > > > It affects whatever uses is_compat_task(), but I can't see anything > > > where that matters except inside some particular syscall or for > > > syscall restart after signals. > > > > FWIW, the origin of this is checkin > > 4d9bc79cd28b779610d9590b3a96a28a0f64a25a (2.6.18-rc1), which somewhat > > unhelpfully states "Make sure is_compat_task works early". It doesn't > > specify what the failure is if is_compat_task doesn't work early. > > Perhaps Andi could explain us why this is needed, > > > On > > the other hand, it sure as heck seems better to set it and not need it > > than the other way around. > > Agreed, but otoh it is always good to understand the code. If we > really have a reason for TS_COMPAT, a small comment can help other > readers. My memory is somewhat fuzzy on this one, but I think it was related to VMA placement (probably for stack randomization or something like that) This happens before the first call. I might be wrong on that. There might also have been other is_compat_task checks in the exec init path, so partly it was defensive programming. -Andi -- ak@linux.intel.com -- Speaking for myself only. -- 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/