[Thread Prev][Thread Next][Thread Index]

Re: 64bit port

To: alex.buell@tahallah.demon.co.uk
Subject: Re: 64bit port
From: David Miller <davem@twiddle.net>
Date: Sat, 1 May 1999 03:40:14 -0700
CC: hpa@transmeta.com, linux-kernel@vger.rutgers.edu
In-reply-to: <Pine.LNX.4.10.9905011108010.2314-100000@tahallah.demon.co.uk>(message from Alex Buell on Sat, 1 May 1999 11:11:21 +0100 (GMT))
References: <Pine.LNX.4.10.9905011108010.2314-100000@tahallah.demon.co.uk>
Reply-To: davem@redhat.com
Sender: owner-linux-kernel@vger.rutgers.edu

   Date: Sat, 1 May 1999 11:11:21 +0100 (GMT)
   From: Alex Buell <alex.buell@tahallah.demon.co.uk>

   Ie. on loading of a binary could quickly scan it for illegal
   sequences and overwrite with NOPs, then execute it. Of course, this
   doesn't cater for things that does J-I-T compilation & execution
   though.

You roughly have described how we hope to work around it.

IRIX does something very similar to work around cpu lockup
bugs on early MIPS r4k parts.

Later,
David S. Miller
davem@redhat.com

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Follow-Ups:
- Re: 64bit port
  - From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@transmeta.com>

References:
- Re: 64bit port
  - From: Alex Buell <alex.buell@tahallah.demon.co.uk>
- Re: 64bit port
  - From: Alex Buell <alex.buell@tahallah.demon.co.uk>

Prev by thread: Re: 64bit port
Next by thread: Re: 64bit port
Index(es):
- Thread