Follow @Openwall on Twitter for new release announcements and other news
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2024 08:22:45 -0400
From: John David Anglin <dave.anglin@...l.net>
To: John Paul Adrian Glaubitz <glaubitz@...sik.fu-berlin.de>,
 Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
 LEROY Christophe <christophe.leroy2@...soprasteria.com>,
 Helge Deller <deller@....de>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...nel.org>,
 Linux-Arch <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
 "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Cc: Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org>, Andreas Larsson <andreas@...sler.com>,
 guoren <guoren@...nel.org>, Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@...roup.eu>,
 "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
 "sparclinux@...r.kernel.org" <sparclinux@...r.kernel.org>,
 "linux-s390@...r.kernel.org" <linux-s390@...r.kernel.org>,
 "linux-sh@...r.kernel.org" <linux-sh@...r.kernel.org>,
 "linux-csky@...r.kernel.org" <linux-csky@...r.kernel.org>,
 "Naveen N. Rao" <naveen.n.rao@...ux.ibm.com>,
 Heiko Carstens <hca@...ux.ibm.com>,
 "musl@...ts.openwall.com" <musl@...ts.openwall.com>,
 Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@...il.com>, Alexander Viro
 <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>, LTP List <ltp@...ts.linux.it>,
 Brian Cain <bcain@...cinc.com>, Christian Brauner <brauner@...nel.org>,
 Thomas Bogendoerfer <tsbogend@...ha.franken.de>,
 Xi Ruoyao <libc-alpha@...rceware.org>,
 "linux-parisc@...r.kernel.org" <linux-parisc@...r.kernel.org>,
 "linux-mips@...r.kernel.org" <linux-mips@...r.kernel.org>,
 Adhemerval Zanella Netto <adhemerval.zanella@...aro.org>,
 "linux-hexagon@...r.kernel.org" <linux-hexagon@...r.kernel.org>,
 "linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
 "linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org" <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
 "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 07/15] parisc: use generic sys_fanotify_mark
 implementation

On 2024-06-21 4:54 a.m., John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, 2024-06-21 at 08:28 +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>> It's more likely to be related to the upward growing stack.
>> I checked the gcc sources and found that out of the 50 supported
>> architectures, ARGS_GROW_DOWNWARD is set on everything except
>> for gcn, stormy16 and  32-bit parisc. The other two are
>> little-endian though. STACK_GROWS_DOWNWARD in turn is set on
>> everything other than parisc (both 32-bit and 64-bit).
> Wait a second! Does that mean that on 64-bit PA-RISC, the stack is
> actually growing downwards? If yes, that would be a strong argument
> for creating a 64-bit PA-RISC port in Debian and replacing the 32-bit
> port.
No, the stack grows upward on both 32 and 64-bit parisc.  But stack arguments
grow upwards on 64-bit parisc.  The argument pointer is needed to access these
arguments.  In 32-bit parisc, the argument pointer is at a fixed offset relative to the
stack pointer and it can be eliminated.

Dave

-- 
John David Anglin  dave.anglin@...l.net

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.