Re: [-mm patch] ptrace: make {put,get}reg work again for gs and fs

2006-12-22 Thread Frederik Deweerdt
On Thu, Dec 21, 2006 at 10:54:14PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Fri, 22 Dec 2006 06:06:18 + > Frederik Deweerdt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Thu, Dec 21, 2006 at 06:11:08PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > > > On Thu, 21 Dec 2006 18:00:49 -0800 > > > Jeremy Fitzhardinge <[EMAIL PROTECT

Re: [-mm patch] ptrace: make {put,get}reg work again for gs and fs

2006-12-21 Thread Jeremy Fitzhardinge
Andrew Morton wrote: > OK, but you're using -mm, yes? And -mm has (the rather irritating) > convert-i386-pda-code-to-use-%fs.patch in it. > > So perhaps your fix is a -mm-only thing? > Yes, I think that's true. J - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" i

Re: [-mm patch] ptrace: make {put,get}reg work again for gs and fs

2006-12-21 Thread Jeremy Fitzhardinge
Frederik Deweerdt wrote: > On Thu, Dec 21, 2006 at 11:22:05AM -0800, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote: > >> Frederik Deweerdt wrote: >> >>> Following the i386 pda patches, it's not possible to set gs or fs value >>> from gdb anymore. The following patch restores the old behaviour of >>> getting an

Re: [-mm patch] ptrace: make {put,get}reg work again for gs and fs

2006-12-21 Thread Jeremy Fitzhardinge
Andrew Morton wrote: > The below is what I have queued for urgent mainlining to address these > problems. > > Is it sufficient? > It is sufficient to fix the serious eflags-clobbering bug, but it doesn't fix the read-and-modify correctness problem Frederik found. J - To unsubscribe from th

Re: [-mm patch] ptrace: make {put,get}reg work again for gs and fs

2006-12-21 Thread Frederik Deweerdt
On Thu, Dec 21, 2006 at 06:11:08PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Thu, 21 Dec 2006 18:00:49 -0800 > Jeremy Fitzhardinge <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Frederik Deweerdt wrote: > > > This is a -mm1 kernel + your efl_offset fix + the attached patch. > > > So the problem came from putreg still sa

Re: [-mm patch] ptrace: make {put,get}reg work again for gs and fs

2006-12-21 Thread Jeremy Fitzhardinge
Frederik Deweerdt wrote: > This is a -mm1 kernel + your efl_offset fix + the attached patch. > So the problem came from putreg still saving %gs to the stack where > there's no slot for it, whereas getreg got things right. > That patch looks good, but I think it is already effectively in Andrew'

Re: [-mm patch] ptrace: make {put,get}reg work again for gs and fs

2006-12-21 Thread Frederik Deweerdt
On Thu, Dec 21, 2006 at 11:22:05AM -0800, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote: > Frederik Deweerdt wrote: > > Following the i386 pda patches, it's not possible to set gs or fs value > > from gdb anymore. The following patch restores the old behaviour of > > getting and setting thread.gs of thread.fs respecti

Re: [-mm patch] ptrace: make {put,get}reg work again for gs and fs

2006-12-21 Thread Frederik Deweerdt
On Thu, Dec 21, 2006 at 11:22:05AM -0800, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote: > Frederik Deweerdt wrote: > > Following the i386 pda patches, it's not possible to set gs or fs value > > from gdb anymore. The following patch restores the old behaviour of > > getting and setting thread.gs of thread.fs respecti

Re: [-mm patch] ptrace: make {put,get}reg work again for gs and fs

2006-12-21 Thread Jeremy Fitzhardinge
Frederik Deweerdt wrote: > Following the i386 pda patches, it's not possible to set gs or fs value > from gdb anymore. The following patch restores the old behaviour of > getting and setting thread.gs of thread.fs respectively. > Here's a gdb session *before* the patch: > (gdb) info reg > [...] > f