Ralf Baechle wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 24, 2002 at 11:07:24AM +0200, Carsten Langgaard wrote:
> > The 'sys_syscall' syscall isn't properly implemented in the 64-bit
> > kernel (for o32 as well as n64).
> > Below is a patch, it seems to work for in the o32 case, but I haven't
> > tested the n64 version (obviously).
> > +/*
> > + * Do the indirect syscall syscall.
> > + * Don't care about kernel locking; the actual syscall will do it.
> > + *
> > + * XXX This is broken.
> > + */
> As the comment says - it's broken. This implementation just like it's
> 32-bit predecessor don't handle the error return value correctly. Worse,
> there's unprotected accesses to userspace which allow any user crashing
> the system ...
At least it makes my system work as well as for the 32-bit kernel.
_ _ ____ ___ Carsten Langgaard Mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org
|\ /|||___)(___ MIPS Denmark Direct: +45 4486 5527
| \/ ||| ____) Lautrupvang 4B Switch: +45 4486 5555
TECHNOLOGIES 2750 Ballerup Fax...: +45 4486 5556