From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754383AbbHRWmV (ORCPT ); Tue, 18 Aug 2015 18:42:21 -0400 Received: from mail-oi0-f52.google.com ([209.85.218.52]:34939 "EHLO mail-oi0-f52.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752752AbbHRWmU convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Tue, 18 Aug 2015 18:42:20 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <55D2D0DE.3080707@list.ru> References: <55CA90B4.2010205@list.ru> <55D2D0DE.3080707@list.ru> From: Andy Lutomirski Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2015 15:42:00 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [regression] x86/signal/64: Fix SS handling for signals delivered to 64-bit programs breaks dosemu To: Stas Sergeev Cc: Brian Gerst , Linux kernel Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 11:29 PM, Stas Sergeev wrote: > 13.08.2015 20:00, Brian Gerst пишет: > >> On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 11:43 AM, Andy Lutomirski >> wrote: >>> >>> On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 8:37 AM, Linus Torvalds >>> wrote: >>>> >>>> On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 5:17 PM, Stas Sergeev wrote: >>>>> >>>>> I realize this patch may be good to have in general, but >>>>> breaking userspace without a single warning is a bit >>>>> discouraging. Seems like the old "we don't break userspace" >>>>> rule have gone. >>>> >>>> That rule hasn't gone anywhere. >>>> >>>> Does a plain revert just fix everything? Because if so, that's the >>>> right thing to do, and we can just re-visit this later. >>>> >>>> I don't understand why Andy and Ingo are even discussing this. What >>>> the f*ck, guys? >>>> >>> I'm trying to fix it without reverting. If that doesn't work, then we >>> revert. Yesterday, I thought I had a reasonably clean fix, but it >>> turned out that it only solved half of the problem. >>> >>> If we revert, I think I need to check what will break due to the >>> revert. I need to check at least Wine, and we'll have to do something >>> about all the selftests that will start failing. I also need to check >>> CRIU, and IIRC CRIU has started using the new sigcontext SS in new >>> versions. >> >> I don't think Wine will be a problem, at least how it is currently set >> up. 16-bit support is only in the 32-bit build. The 64-bit build >> only supports Win64 apps, and will call the 32-bit version (installed >> in parallel) to run 32 and 16-bit apps. > > Is this also because of the lack of the proper 32/16bit support in > a 64bit kernels? If so, dosemu's work-arounds do not look like the > too bad thing compared to that. :) What do you mean lack of proper 32/16 bit support? --Andy