linuxolator: amd64 Linux Test Project failures

[Alexander Leidinger]

Quoting Marcin Cieslak <saper at SYSTEM.PL> (from Wed, 03 Jan 2007  
01:27:31 +0100):

> Divacky Roman wrote:
>> On Tue, Jan 02, 2007 at 09:55:47AM +0100, Alexander Leidinger wrote:
>>> Quoting Scot Hetzel <swhetzel at gmail.com> (from Sun, 31 Dec 2006    
>>> 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   
>> it be better
>> to move that to some MI file instead?
>>
>> and there are tons of similar code.. for example linux_pause. how   
>> 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  
an i386 linuxolator on amd64 ATM. So differences in the default  
behavior need to be compensated.

Bye,
Alexander.

-- 
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 = B0063FE7
http://www.FreeBSD.org       netchild @ FreeBSD.org  : PGP ID = 72077137