Re: [PATCH 3/3] x86, vdso32: handle 32 bit vDSO larger one page

[Andy Lutomirski]

On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 12:21 PM, Linus Torvalds
<torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Mar 13, 2014 12:13 PM, "Andy Lutomirski" <luto@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> How?  We either set null in AT_SYSINFO_EHDR, we set something simple
>> that SuSE is okay with (and compile separate images?) or we set
>> something fancy and not relocated, and SuSE crashes.
>
> Yeah, I was thinking that "something simple is the fixmap space that suse
> would be happy with"
>
> Keyword being "simple", ie so simple that it's not a maintenance headache
> even if it's different from the "real" vdso.
>
> But I suspect we don't really need it.

I agree.  Also, the syscall instruction selection is currently rather
complicated, and I don't think it can ever be *that* simple :(

>
>> On a related note: is it okay to keep the option called
>> CONFIG_COMPAT_VDSO but change the default to n?
>
> Yes. If you start from scratch with a config, you have to get the options
> right. It's just the "I upgraded the kernel, did an oldconfig, and it
> doesn't work" case that we should avoid.
>
> The alternative would be to make a new config name, but then it has to
> default to the compatible state (iow no vdso at all by default), because
> that's the rule: make oldconfig should work for people.
>
> Basically, kernel upgrades should be nobrainers and "just work".

OK.  I'll send out new patches.

--Andy
--
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/