Re: Again: UML on s390 (31Bit)

From: Martin Schwidefsky
Date: Thu Apr 28 2005 - 08:06:01 EST

Bodo Stroesser <bstroesser@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote on 04/28/2005
11:54:17 AM:

> > This patch is not good. !entryexit indicates that you want to change
the trap
> > indication on the first of the two calls of syscall_trace for a system
call. The
> > second condition is gprs[2] < 0 but that can be true for a normal
system call as
> > well, like sys_exit(-1).
> Sorry, that's not right. At that point, gprs[2] holds the syscall number,
while the
> first argument of the syscall is in origgpr2. If the debugger sets the
syscall number
> to -1, which is an invalid syscall, changing trap to -1 will result in a
> behavior only in case, that the debugger on the second syscall
interception also sets
> the syscall result to ERESTARTXXXXX (This again is modifying gprs[2]).
> normally would/could be handled by do_signal(), but with the patch it no
longer will.
> So, I think the patch doesn't hurt in normal cases, but does the trick
for UML.

Yes, your are right. gprs[2] holds the syscall number for the debugger to
So (!entryexit & regs->gprs[2] < 0) translates to the debugger changed the
system call to something illegal on the first of the two ptrace calls. So
patch doesn't hurt for normal, non-ptraced operation but it might hurt
users of ptrace.

> > Independent from that it do not understand why you need it at all. If
> > uml host intercepted and invalidated the guest system call the system
> > indication bit _TIF_RESTART_SVC shouldn't be set because the guest
> > execute a system call.
> Let my explain a bit more. UML invalidates UML-user's syscalls on the
host, processes
> the syscall itself and inserts the result into gprs[2] on the second
> interception. For nearly all syscalls ERESTARTXXXXX is a result not
returned to user,
> but handled in UML kernel internally. But that's not true for
> The "result" of those is the original contents of gpr2 of the interrupted
> which accidentally also might be ERESTARTXXXXXXX (BTW, that's the reason
> sys_(rt_)sigreturn setting trap to -1 also). We skip UML's syscall
restart handling
> in this case, but we need to skip it in the host, too.

Ok, I think I've understood the problem now. What you are basically have is
a process running in a UML guest that happens to have -ERESTARTXXX in grp2
when it gets interrupted. A signal is delivered and on return from that
with sys_(rt_)sigreturn >another< signal might be pending and then
gets confused because of -ERESTARTXXX in grp2. For normal, non-uml
restore_sigregs resets regs->trap to -1 which avoids the confusion. With
the host intercepts sys_rt_sigreturn and does whatever needs to be done for
the guest >except< resetting regs->trap to -1. So the problem seems to be
that you need a ptrace interface to do that. I don't think it is a good
to kludge syscall_trace to reset regs->trap under some conditions.

blue skies,

Martin Schwidefsky
Linux for zSeries Development & Services
IBM Deutschland Entwicklung GmbH

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at