From owner-freebsd-emulation@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jan 3 08:15:58 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3A71416A407 for ; Wed, 3 Jan 2007 08:15:58 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from alexander@leidinger.net) Received: from redbull.bpaserver.net (redbullneu.bpaserver.net [213.198.78.217]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BF13413C442 for ; Wed, 3 Jan 2007 08:15:57 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from alexander@leidinger.net) Received: from outgoing.leidinger.net (p54A5F246.dip.t-dialin.net [84.165.242.70]) by redbull.bpaserver.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id D32622E1A4; Wed, 3 Jan 2007 09:19:56 +0100 (CET) Received: from webmail.leidinger.net (webmail.Leidinger.net [192.168.1.102]) by outgoing.leidinger.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4ED695B4847; Wed, 3 Jan 2007 09:15:49 +0100 (CET) Received: (from www@localhost) by webmail.leidinger.net (8.13.8/8.13.8/Submit) id l038FlZ3048893; Wed, 3 Jan 2007 09:15:47 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from Alexander@Leidinger.net) Received: from pslux.cec.eu.int (pslux.cec.eu.int [158.169.9.14]) by webmail.leidinger.net (Horde MIME library) with HTTP; Wed, 03 Jan 2007 09:15:46 +0100 Message-ID: <20070103091546.e6vucwvbk0wk8c80@webmail.leidinger.net> X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Date: Wed, 03 Jan 2007 09:15:46 +0100 From: Alexander Leidinger To: Marcin Cieslak References: <790a9fff0612290911t5ae69715gd2bf0dda0f9228f2@mail.gmail.com> <20061229213509.GA86839@stud.fit.vutbr.cz> <790a9fff0612291424g4ecbd088i7846d248851b3e63@mail.gmail.com> <20061230120722.GA36814@stud.fit.vutbr.cz> <790a9fff0612301926n1562d560r1f3fff9af4bdb138@mail.gmail.com> <790a9fff0612301955r35b16472r2429fbe3fce78228@mail.gmail.com> <20061231144257.61520dc8@Magellan.Leidinger.net> <20061231142412.GA28462@stud.fit.vutbr.cz> <790a9fff0612311121l662736e0ud6d3220382af072a@mail.gmail.com> <20070102095547.jv0m82h7bkc4ss04@webmail.leidinger.net> <20070102165317.GA35202@stud.fit.vutbr.cz> <459AF873.2060907@SYSTEM.PL> In-Reply-To: <459AF873.2060907@SYSTEM.PL> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; DelSp="Yes"; format="flowed" Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable User-Agent: Internet Messaging Program (IMP) H3 (4.1.3) / FreeBSD-7.0 X-BPAnet-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-BPAnet-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-BPAnet-MailScanner-SpamCheck: not spam, SpamAssassin (not cached, score=-14.864, required 6, autolearn=not spam, BAYES_00 -15.00, DK_POLICY_SIGNSOME 0.00, FORGED_RCVD_HELO 0.14) X-BPAnet-MailScanner-From: alexander@leidinger.net X-Spam-Status: No Cc: freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org Subject: Re: linuxolator: amd64 Linux Test Project failures X-BeenThere: freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Development of Emulators of other operating systems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 03 Jan 2007 08:15:58 -0000 Quoting Marcin Cieslak (from Wed, 03 Jan 2007 =20 01:27:31 +0100): > Divacky Roman wrote: >> On Tue, Jan 02, 2007 at 09:55:47AM +0100, Alexander Leidinger wrote: >>> Quoting Scot Hetzel (from Sun, 31 Dec 2006 =20 >>> 13:21:27 -0600): >>> >>>> That patch to mmap fixes the problems with mmap on amd64, and brings >>>> the failed LTP testcases closer to the i386 failed testcases. >>> Thanks for testing, I try to get time to commit this. >> >> which makes me wonder what is MD on the linux_mmap* code. wouldnt =20 >> it be better >> to move that to some MI file instead? >> >> and there are tons of similar code.. for example linux_pause. how =20 >> is this MD? >> I'd vote for moving that code.. >> >> opinions? > > For example amd64 implements execute protection natively (PROT_EXEC), > while on i386 there is no way to separate this from PROT_READ. Other > platforms (sparc) may have different mmap implementations and we may > require different linux_mmap() behaviour (for example, on i386 > PROT_EXEC silently implies PROT_READ, on amd64 it does not have to be > the case). > > Having said that, we *may* be lucky and end up with identical mmap > emulation for all platforms. But I would prefer to test PROT_EXEC > compatibility first before we do that. Probably we should extend mmap > fingerprinter to test for expected PROT_EXEC behaviour. I want to note that we don't have an amd64 linuxulator... we only have =20 an i386 linuxolator on amd64 ATM. So differences in the default =20 behavior need to be compensated. Bye, Alexander. --=20 We all like praise, but a hike in our pay is the best kind of ways. http://www.Leidinger.net Alexander @ Leidinger.net: PGP ID =3D B0063FE7 http://www.FreeBSD.org netchild @ FreeBSD.org : PGP ID =3D 72077137