On Tue, Oct 7, 2014 at 12:21 PM, Rich Felker <dalias@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Tue, Oct 07, 2014 at 12:16:59PM -0700, Leonid Yegoshin wrote:
On 10/07/2014 12:09 PM, Rich Felker wrote:
I agree completely here. We should not break things (or, as itAnd what do you propose - remove a current in-stack emulation and
seems, leave them broken) for common usage cases that affect
everyone just to coddle proprietary vendor-specific instructions.
The latter just should not be used in delay slots unless the chip
vendor also promises to provide fpu branch in hardware. Rich
you still think it doesn't break a status-quo?
The in-stack trampoline support could be left but used only for
emulating instructions the kernel doesn't know. This would make all
normal binaries immediately usable with non-executable stack, and
would avoid the only potential source of regressions. Ultimately I
think the "xol" stuff should be removed, but that could be a long term
goal.
Does anything break if the xol stuff is disabled for PT_GNU_STACK tasks?