* Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > The s390 vdso preparation patch "arch_setup_additional_pages argument" > touches other architectures (x86, sh and powerpc): > > arch_setup_additional_pages currently gets two arguments, the binary > format descripton and an indication if the process uses an executable > stack or not. The second argument is not used by anybody, it could be > removed without replacement. hm, this is the first time i've seen this change, and it looks a bit weird: --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/elf.h +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/elf.h @@ -325,7 +325,7 @@ struct linux_binprm; #define ARCH_HAS_SETUP_ADDITIONAL_PAGES 1 extern int arch_setup_additional_pages(struct linux_binprm *bprm, - int executable_stack); + int uses_interp); why didnt you just add a new uses_interp argument? executable_stack is passed in to potentially enable architectures to be aware of how conservative/legacy the address-space of the binary is - whether to randomize the vdso, etc. exec-shield used to take advantage of that. But there seems to be no in-tree use of that (and if one arises it can just add back that parameter), and i dont want to stand in the way of your pull request either, so for the x86 bits: Acked-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxx> Ingo -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-s390" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
