> > As far as I know, though, the SYSENTER patch didn't deal with several of
> > the corner cases introduced by the generally weird SYSENTER instruction
> > (such as the fact that V86 tasks can execute it despite the fact there
> > is in general no way to resume execution of the V86 task afterwards.)
> > In practice this means that vsyscalls is pretty much the only sensible
> > way to do this. Also note that INT 80h will need to be supported
> > indefinitely.
> > Personally, I wonder if it's worth the trouble, when x86-64 takes care
> > of the issue anyway :)
> There is another way:
> Have apps enter kernel mode via Intel's purposely undefined
> instruction, plus a few bytes of padding and identification.
> Require that this not cross a page boundry. When it faults,
> write the SYSENTER, INT 0x80, or SYSCALL as needed. Leave
> the page marked clean so it doesn't need to hit swap; if it
> gets paged in again it gets patched again.
Thats *very* dirty hack. vsyscalls seem cleaner than that.
-- Worst form of spam? Adding advertisment signatures ala sourceforge.net. What goes next? Inserting advertisment *into* email? - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to firstname.lastname@example.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/