From: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
To: Michael Schmitz <schmitzmic@gmail.com>
Cc: linux-m68k@lists.linux-m68k.org,
Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>,
Greg Ungerer <gerg@linux-m68k.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] m68k: leave stack mangling to asm wrapper of sigreturn()
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2021 00:19:43 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YUKNn3erTbH+ytpM@zeniv-ca.linux.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <08183665-f846-0c5e-a8c7-d0a65e78a3da@gmail.com>
On Thu, Sep 16, 2021 at 11:35:05AM +1200, Michael Schmitz wrote:
> This one's a little harder - you use a 84 byte gap on each sigreturn, no
> matter what the frame size we need to restore. The original
> mangle_kernel_stack() only makes room on the stack when it has no other
> option (using twice as much size - correct me if I'm wrong).
>
> Ideally, we'd only leave a gap for mangle_kernel_stack() to use if the frame
> size requires us to do so. Working that out in asm glue would be
> sufficiently convoluted as to cancel out the benefits of cleaning up the C
> sigreturn part. Probably not worth it.
You'd need to
* load the frame type from sigcontext (and deal with EFAULT, etc.)
* make decision based on that
* pass the type down into sigreturn(), so we wouldn't run into
mismatches.
And all that just to avoid a single "subtract a constant from stack pointer"
insn. We are on a very shallow kernel stack here - it's a syscall entry,
after all. And the stack footprint of do_sigreturn() is fairly small - e.g.
stat(2) eats a lot more.
We are not initializing the gap either - it's just reserved on stack; we only
access it if we need to enlarge the stack frame.
IOW, what would be the benefit of trying to avoid unconditional gap there?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-09-16 0:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-07-25 17:18 [RFC][CFT] signal handling fixes Al Viro
2021-07-25 17:19 ` [PATCH 1/3] m68k: handle arrivals of multiple signals correctly Al Viro
2021-09-15 22:08 ` Michael Schmitz
2021-07-25 17:19 ` [PATCH 2/3] m68k: update ->thread.esp0 before calling syscall_trace() in ret_from_signal Al Viro
2021-09-15 22:19 ` Michael Schmitz
2021-07-25 17:20 ` [PATCH 3/3] m68k: leave stack mangling to asm wrapper of sigreturn() Al Viro
2021-09-15 23:35 ` Michael Schmitz
2021-09-16 0:19 ` Al Viro [this message]
2021-09-16 0:53 ` Michael Schmitz
2021-09-16 3:21 ` Al Viro
2021-09-16 5:02 ` Michael Schmitz
2021-09-16 16:14 ` Al Viro
2021-07-27 10:21 ` [RFC][CFT] signal handling fixes Finn Thain
2021-07-27 14:42 ` Al Viro
2021-07-28 1:23 ` Finn Thain
2021-08-11 1:42 ` Finn Thain
2021-09-16 9:03 ` Finn Thain
2021-09-23 14:43 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2021-09-23 14:45 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=YUKNn3erTbH+ytpM@zeniv-ca.linux.org.uk \
--to=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
--cc=geert@linux-m68k.org \
--cc=gerg@linux-m68k.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-m68k@lists.linux-m68k.org \
--cc=schmitzmic@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).