On Thu, 2006-08-31 at 07:20 -0700, Tom Rini wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 31, 2006 at 04:07:15PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > Piet Delaney <[email protected]> writes:
> > > >
> > > > ENOPATCH
> > >
> > > Opps.
> >
> > What an ugly patch!
> >
> > But it should be totally obsolete with the unwinder work Jan and me have been
> > doing recently which does this all properly. .18 isn't quite there
> > yet in all cases, but .19 will be hopefully.
>
> Indeed. But quite functional. Have you guys been doing i386 as well?
> This kind of thing was needed to convince gdb when it really was time to
> stop trying unwind in a few cases, but looks quite bad on x86_64/i386.
> Thankfully getting it to stop on ARM was pretty easy (but it wasn't
> full/true annotations).
I wonder if we are killing a fly with a sledgehammer. On SunOS 4.1.4 I
just patched the top of stack with a NULL pointer. With SPARC the kernel
uses different registers than the user and don't recall their being a
problem with a NULL pointer being at the top of the kernel stack. Is
there a problem with the i386 architecture with the top of the kernel
stack having a NULL pointer? My guess is that it's needed to return
to the right place in user space.
-piet
>
--
Piet Delaney
BlueLane Teck
W: (408) 200-5256; [email protected]
H: (408) 243-8872; [email protected]
-
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/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
