From owner-freebsd-emulation@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Jan 23 21:24:38 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 EEEE416A403; Tue, 23 Jan 2007 21:24:38 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from xdivac02@stud.fit.vutbr.cz) Received: from eva.fit.vutbr.cz (eva.fit.vutbr.cz [147.229.176.14]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 86AF013C468; Tue, 23 Jan 2007 21:24:38 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from xdivac02@stud.fit.vutbr.cz) Received: from eva.fit.vutbr.cz (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by eva.fit.vutbr.cz (envelope-from xdivac02@eva.fit.vutbr.cz) (8.13.8/8.13.7) with ESMTP id l0NLOaLD023997 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 23 Jan 2007 22:24:36 +0100 (CET) Received: (from xdivac02@localhost) by eva.fit.vutbr.cz (8.13.8/8.13.3/Submit) id l0NLOasC023994; Tue, 23 Jan 2007 22:24:36 +0100 (CET) Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2007 22:24:36 +0100 From: Divacky Roman To: Jung-uk Kim Message-ID: <20070123212436.GA23722@stud.fit.vutbr.cz> References: <790a9fff0701211041j1176d00gd6dd75d0989cf4ec@mail.gmail.com> <20070122212624.GA49466@stud.fit.vutbr.cz> <200701230101.51580.tijl@ulyssis.org> <200701231400.46367.jkim@FreeBSD.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200701231400.46367.jkim@FreeBSD.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.2i X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.57 on 147.229.176.14 Cc: freebsd-emulation@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: linuxolator: tls_test results amd64 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: Tue, 23 Jan 2007 21:24:39 -0000 > I was little quiet yesterday because I wasn't sure. But I have more > evidence now. First of all, wrmsr(MSR_KGSBASE, ...) must be > protected with 'if (td == curthread)' just as cpu_set_user_tls() this is not true... in set_thread_area td is curthread all the time and in clone its never true... so the condition becomes constant. (i386 is exactly the same case) feel free to prove me wrong :)