* Rusty Russell <[email protected]> wrote: > But it turns out that this is a known problem with FC1's glibc and the > exec-shield patches (google for FC1 glibc vdso). [..] no, i think that conclusion is wrong. The FC1 glibc and vdso problems *when mixing a FC2 kernel with a FC1 glibc* were due to exec-shield enforcing non-exec for the vdso. > [...] When Ingo and Arjan convinced me to push their code from > exec-shield, they conveniently didn't mention this. this bug has nothing to do with nonexec restrictions. [ Also, this all was _years_ and hundreds of bugs ago, when upstream's position was still a cocky "who the hell needs protection against overflows" and "go away with this non-exec crap" so we were pretty much alone trying to introduce those features. So any suggestion of intention on our part would be quite unfair. ] Ingo - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: [patch] i386, vdso=[0|1] boot option and /proc/sys/vm/vdso_enabled
- From: Rusty Russell <[email protected]>
- Re: [patch] i386, vdso=[0|1] boot option and /proc/sys/vm/vdso_enabled
- References:
- Re: [PATCH] Gerd Hoffman's move-vsyscall-into-user-address-range patch
- From: Ingo Molnar <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH] Gerd Hoffman's move-vsyscall-into-user-address-range patch
- From: Andrew Morton <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH] Gerd Hoffman's move-vsyscall-into-user-address-range patch
- From: Linus Torvalds <[email protected]>
- [patch] i386, vdso=[0|1] boot option and /proc/sys/vm/vdso_enabled
- From: Ingo Molnar <[email protected]>
- Re: [patch] i386, vdso=[0|1] boot option and /proc/sys/vm/vdso_enabled
- From: Andrew Morton <[email protected]>
- Re: [patch] i386, vdso=[0|1] boot option and /proc/sys/vm/vdso_enabled
- From: Zachary Amsden <[email protected]>
- Re: [patch] i386, vdso=[0|1] boot option and /proc/sys/vm/vdso_enabled
- From: Andrew Morton <[email protected]>
- Re: [patch] i386, vdso=[0|1] boot option and /proc/sys/vm/vdso_enabled
- From: Zachary Amsden <[email protected]>
- Re: [patch] i386, vdso=[0|1] boot option and /proc/sys/vm/vdso_enabled
- From: Rusty Russell <[email protected]>
- Re: [patch] i386, vdso=[0|1] boot option and /proc/sys/vm/vdso_enabled
- From: Rusty Russell <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH] Gerd Hoffman's move-vsyscall-into-user-address-range patch
- Prev by Date: Re: swapper: page allocation failure.
- Next by Date: Re: swapper: page allocation failure.
- Previous by thread: Re: [patch] i386, vdso=[0|1] boot option and /proc/sys/vm/vdso_enabled
- Next by thread: Re: [patch] i386, vdso=[0|1] boot option and /proc/sys/vm/vdso_enabled
- Index(es):
 |