RE: [PATCH 07/56] microblaze_v2: Signal support

[Stephen Neuendorffer]

I'm somewhat ignorant about what this code is attempting to do, but with
some quick poking around (m68knommu, blackfin) seems to suggest that
other architectures don't do this, while others (v850) have almost
exactly the same code (although they are somewhat smarter and are
careful not to flush the whole cache).

At the very least, it seems like there is some work in this area needed.

Steve

> -----Original Message-----
> From: John Williams [mailto:john.williams@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Monday, May 05, 2008 4:34 PM
> To: Stephen Neuendorffer
> Cc: monstr@xxxxxxxxx; linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; arnd@xxxxxxxx;
linux-arch@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; John
> Linn; matthew@xxxxxx; will.newton@xxxxxxxxx; drepper@xxxxxxxxxx;
microblaze-uclinux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
> grant.likely@xxxxxxxxxxxx; Michal Simek
> Subject: RE: [PATCH 07/56] microblaze_v2: Signal support
> 
> On Mon, 2008-05-05 at 14:32 -0700, Stephen Neuendorffer wrote:
> > (multiple places)  can this code (and flush_cache_sigtramp()) go
away?
> >
> > +#if 0
> > +		flush_cache_sigtramp((unsigned long)frame->tramp);
> > +#endif
> 
> You have to icache_invalidate the sigtramp because you are writing
into
> memory that will shortly be executed.
> 
> I'm not sure why this is #if'd away in the first place?
> 
> John
> 
> 


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/