linux-mips
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Cannot unwind through MIPS signal frames with ICACHE_REFILLS_WORKARO

To: "Kevin D. Kissell" <kevink@mips.com>
Subject: Re: Cannot unwind through MIPS signal frames with ICACHE_REFILLS_WORKAROUND_WAR
From: "Franck Bui-Huu" <vagabon.xyz@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2007 15:49:16 +0100
Cc: "Ralf Baechle" <ralf@linux-mips.org>, "Andrew Haley" <aph-gcc@littlepinkcloud.com>, "David Daney" <ddaney@avtrex.com>, linux-mips@linux-mips.org, "Richard Sandiford" <rsandifo@nildram.co.uk>, gcc@gcc.gnu.org
Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; bh=yf4RU0KmsKQvklRVXHk4ecXqABOIXjXK9TqO0vcmzwk=; b=tjIe/iLwc+BCiUM40lr6eDOfv9Ug3axzAeJMWCJGMlsexGtxNJvrBtcKGfAzIZc/KZ3N6n1qlUqYnV8eazvC8Om7yGX8xzTDN0awJqjBQU4QySU6N0zYnLEF3PcF+R2+Ib6S8Wod/yjSBQD+lZtsaz5VU4rTvYCQf6SDOsDcdG4=
Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=Fe855liofhW+SW5dhlSq+zSLEr+v8sdcsamlBdAcvMLTEnGtJdcHMVeohhhLuSKXUtw6RHNtMeH2JEL2te+bMTnsl7nGQKi7WPP2cv8p+JzeTgUmJGmKzja+PG9gl9qmt9+MaLRpuUdtlkAMwBW/d1FQlxLZEc/TaYbIxCRxr/E=
In-reply-to: <019e01c82602$f5463bf0$10eca8c0@grendel>
Original-recipient: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org
References: <473957B6.3030202@avtrex.com> <18233.36645.232058.964652@zebedee.pink> <20071113121036.GA6582@linux-mips.org> <cda58cb80711130514x16356ea3x4069616c9ee3caac@mail.gmail.com> <019e01c82602$f5463bf0$10eca8c0@grendel>
Sender: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org
On Nov 13, 2007 3:37 PM, Kevin D. Kissell <kevink@mips.com> wrote:
> Franck a dit:
> > > Another reason is to get rid of the classic trampoline the kernel installs
> > > on the stack.  On some multiprocessor systems it requires a cacheflush
> > > operation to be performed on all processors which is expensive.  Having
> > > the trampoline in a vDSO would solve that.
> > >
> >
> > And the stack wouldn't need to have exec permission anymore.
>
> True, though it should perhaps be noted that currently it's only on 4KSc/Sd
> systems (which I know you work on) where it's even possible for the stack
> *not* to have exec permissions, since the classical MIPS MMU gives
> execute permission to any page that is readable.
>

Well, the noexec stack is pretty usefull I think. I can't believe it
will be limited to these 2 systems in the near future...

-- 
               Franck

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>