Re: kern/53261: kernel crash during test run

[Kamil Rytarowski <n54%gmx.com@localhost>]

The following reply was made to PR kern/53261; it has been noted by GNATS.

From: Kamil Rytarowski <n54%gmx.com@localhost>
To: gnats-bugs%NetBSD.org@localhost
Cc: 
Subject: Re: kern/53261: kernel crash during test run
Date: Wed, 23 May 2018 16:02:03 +0200

 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156)
 --nSfDwMRnAQN1zphBr0UMCVhl5WCwAh4y1
 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="WyuGTdPD8dMIX8xoFqo9gHJCj3o7UGNBX";
  protected-headers="v1"
 From: Kamil Rytarowski <n54%gmx.com@localhost>
 To: gnats-bugs%NetBSD.org@localhost
 Message-ID: <b751b199-2a35-0b35-0925-bbb454f70725%gmx.com@localhost>
 Subject: Re: kern/53261: kernel crash during test run
 References: <pr-kern-53261%gnats.netbsd.org@localhost>
  <20180523135501.B92F17A21F%mollari.NetBSD.org@localhost>
 In-Reply-To: <20180523135501.B92F17A21F%mollari.NetBSD.org@localhost>
 
 --WyuGTdPD8dMIX8xoFqo9gHJCj3o7UGNBX
 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
 Content-Language: en-US
 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
 
 On 23.05.2018 15:55, Martin Husemann wrote:
 > The following reply was made to PR kern/53261; it has been noted by GNA=
 TS.
 >=20
 > From: Martin Husemann <martin%duskware.de@localhost>
 > To: gnats-bugs%NetBSD.org@localhost
 > Cc:=20
 > Subject: Re: kern/53261: kernel crash during test run
 > Date: Wed, 23 May 2018 15:53:20 +0200
 >=20
 >  On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 01:45:01PM +0000, Kamil Rytarowski wrote:
 >  >  Syscall6 is a wrapper for RawSyscall that is a wrapper for syscall(=
 2).
 >  >  We should just fix the ARM panic and be done with it.
 > =20
 >  You do not understand. Read the syscall(2) man page.
 > =20
 >  Using syscall(2) instead of __syscall(2) for any of the calls I listed=
 
 >  is illegal.
 > =20
 >  If it works, it is by pure luck. You typically may have such luck on
 >  _LP64 platforms (all args passed in 64bit registers) and i386 (args
 >  passed on stack) - but usually the wrong arguments will be passed to
 >  the kernel. The sparc case that uwe cited will still fail the call
 >  (but at least not panic the kernel like arm).
 > =20
 
 I need to repeat that I agree that it's not optimal, if it works it's
 not portable.
 
 But we shall be allowed to keep calling the kernel with arbitrary
 arguments. If a user wants to call it and it works, we should keep that
 code functional.
 
 If it breaks, it's not the kernel fault. Just fix the PAD case and leave
 it as it is.
 
 >  Martin
 > =20
 >=20
 
 
 
 --WyuGTdPD8dMIX8xoFqo9gHJCj3o7UGNBX--
 
 --nSfDwMRnAQN1zphBr0UMCVhl5WCwAh4y1
 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
 Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature
 Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc"
 
 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
 
 iQJABAEBCAAqFiEELaxVpweEzw+lMDwuS7MI6bAudmwFAlsFdFsMHG41NEBnbXgu
 Y29tAAoJEEuzCOmwLnZsKJ8P/RF1la+N9Uyq6Z87C7ANESflSqKGyq7qGt7m13Zd
 Lirthi9yG3Zz5nHkyEouSg0Lh+789AqTJk6QvTfCIOfpNvf8QRaClcnafkc0mb4a
 kj/saVUjvJdDdlQTKoeoedTb3joENEgdQzvkdbMwbntoYI9C35EsI4lgi0rrvFkq
 8ddleDExD9aU/dxtyBZEamgTWHrK1KSJTXizbwxoseQiIf2QS0Lpqv5u4ew3m27B
 c2M6Hyy5Qn4QFUQ8pbrlMRe4mffEcAWVvoqAtDnwTQsMgQYqWg6LGfPPSo5K/2wV
 c5T3Nu/rRyV88Rk14EYKpp95hr3cHOtq47sQROvHdBkV/RhcZkDnjzHltZIY3mrm
 FfC4K17R5TuDqWR1o8AWDfALgQ6zHGcQtZYdAxK+PitPQbUidbFQ+HDrQNYZqkZp
 CxghY8w9KtipsUQVnOmQcmC2iBQIw/DyvvIwB97QXX92IG3+rK9BxDO5Xnb3anus
 cYrmt5pbBxqRniDZo3aIvx2p6Lzam09y9x7F4ZBxxWcXngCqHm2JA453Wuy4Qivd
 4YruTLWf+zWi+ymGyHY73IjkGtF/XAlBSYfac/btg9Nvutwzo9MOB+HH9DkwMB67
 W6bKQSkgS5N81Up2dfMD3ZgJOuvSdNklEDv5G+W13HR+qTXYWS7+5fOqSKbUAsP/
 p2gQ
 =RXfI
 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
 
 --nSfDwMRnAQN1zphBr0UMCVhl5WCwAh4y1--