RE: [RFC PATCH 1/1] x86/traps: Get rid of exception handlers' second argument error code

[Li, Xin3]

> > The IDT event delivery of X86_TRAP_DF, X86_TRAP_TS, X86_TRAP_NP,
> > X86_TRAP_SS, X86_TRAP_GP, X86_TRAP_AC and X86_TRAP_CP pushes an error
> > code into the orig_ax member of the pt_regs structure, and the error
> > code is passed as the second argument of their C-handlers, although
> > the pt_regs structure is already passed as the first argument.
> >
> > The asm entry code of such faults does the following
> >
> >   movq ORIG_RAX(%rsp), %rsi	/* get error code into 2nd argument*/
> >   movq $-1, ORIG_RAX(%rsp)	/* no syscall to restart */
> >
> > to set the orig_ax member to -1 just before calling the C-handler.
> >
> > In addition, the IRQ entry code uses the second error code argument as
> > its IRQ vector, as the IRQ asm entry code pushes its IRQ vector into
> > the orig_ax member.
> >
> > The commit d99015b1abbad ("x86: move entry_64.S register saving out of
> > the macros") introduced the changes to set orig_ax to -1, but I can't
> > see why it's required. Our tests on x86_64 and x86_32 seem fine if
> > orig_ax is left unchanged instead of set to -1.
> 
> That means that SYSCALL_NUM(regs) get to be garbage; or something like that.

I find SYSCALL_NUM(regs) in tools/testing/selftests/seccomp/seccomp_bpf.c,
but nothing obvious to me.

I think it's clear that once exceptions and IRQs are handled, the original
context will be fully recovered in a normal case.

Is it related to preemption after such a event?

I must have missed something; can you please elaborate it?