Re: New vsyscall emulation breaks JITs
From: Suresh Siddha
Date: Tue Aug 09 2011 - 18:27:57 EST
On Fri, 2011-08-05 at 17:32 -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> On 08/05/2011 05:20 PM, Andrew Lutomirski wrote:
> > I was thinking of 0x20 - 0x39. 0x40, 0x41, and 0x42 should do the
> > trick. I'll cook up a patch.
> > If you want to keep those vectors available for devices as well, we
> > could hook do_general_protection instead, but that's a little messy.
> > Are there x86 machines out there that are starved for interrupt
> > vectors?
> Yes, but 3 aren't going to matter much.
> However, on systems which have interrupt migration enabled we're not
> using 0x21-0x2f for anything (because we need a single interrupt with
> absolutely lowest priority).
Double checked to make sure and we actually allow 0x21-0x2f to be used
for device interrupts (commit 6579b474572fd54c583ac074e8e7aaae926c62ef).
So reserving the vectors in this range should be same as reserving in
any other range available for use.
> Out of that range, there are a couple of
> values which should be safe to use because they would be harmless
> instructions of various forms:
> 0x24 - AND AL, imm8
> 0x25 - AND EAX, imm32
> 0x26 - ES:
> 0x2C - SUB AL, imm8
> 0x2D - SUB EAX, imm32
> 0x2E - CS:
> [Cc: Suresh who is the expert on the interrupt assignments]
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/