[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140627215809.GD16724@brightrain.aerifal.cx>
Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2014 17:58:09 -0400
From: Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org>
To: musl@...ts.openwall.com
Cc: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
Szabolcs Nagy <nsz@...t70.net>, Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: Re: Thread pointer changes
On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 02:47:38PM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> >> > Due to that, any ARMv5 or earlier CPU will always have the kuser helper
> >> > page. ARMv6 and later may or may not have the kuser helper page, but
> >> > there you're really building for a different ABI anyway (VFP-based) and
> >> > you also know that you have the thread registers.
> >>
> >> so is it expected that the libc makes no attempt to provide
> >> portable binary interface for armv5 and armv6?
> >
> > The libc interface that applications make use should not have any
> > dependence on whether KUSER_HELPERS is enabled or disabled, the
> > presence of that page should be totally invisible to applications.
>
> As of right now, an x86_64 libc can have good performance on any
> recent kernel and will work correctly on any kernel. From what you're
> saying, it sounds impossible to implement such a thing on ARM without
> fiddling with /proc.
Indeed. I wasn't even aware of the legacy vsyscall mess for x86_64,
and we're not using it in musl. Keeping it around seems like just a
matter of maintaining API/ABI compatibility with legacy versions of
glibc that are using it. On the other hand, the kuser helper page is
the ONLY way for a libc that's compatible with pre-v6 arm to get
working atomics and TLS.
Rich
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
