Ralf Baechle wrote: > On Mon, Jun 24, 2002 at 11:07:24AM +0200, Carsten Langgaard wrote: > > > The 'sys_syscall' syscall isn't properly implemented in the 64-bit > > kernel (for o32 as well as n64). > > Below is a patch, it seems to work for in the o32 case, but I haven't > > tested the n64 version (obviously). > > > +/* > > + * Do the indirect syscall syscall. > > + * Don't care about kernel locking; the actual syscall will do it. > > + * > > + * XXX This is broken. > > + */ > > As the comment says - it's broken. This implementation just like it's > 32-bit predecessor don't handle the error return value correctly. Worse, > there's unprotected accesses to userspace which allow any user crashing > the system ... > At least it makes my system work as well as for the 32-bit kernel. -- _ _ ____ ___ Carsten Langgaard Mailto:carstenl@mips.com |\ /|||___)(___ MIPS Denmark Direct: +45 4486 5527 | \/ ||| ____) Lautrupvang 4B Switch: +45 4486 5555 TECHNOLOGIES 2750 Ballerup Fax...: +45 4486 5556 Denmark http://www.mips.com
