WARNING - OLD ARCHIVES

This is an archived copy of the Xen.org mailing list, which we have preserved to ensure that existing links to archives are not broken. The live archive, which contains the latest emails, can be found at http://lists.xen.org/
   
 
 
Xen 
 
Home Products Support Community News
 
   
 

xen-devel

RE: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] 32on64 call gate support

To: "Keir Fraser" <Keir.Fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: RE: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] 32on64 call gate support
From: "Petersson, Mats" <Mats.Petersson@xxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2007 11:18:53 +0100
Cc: Xen Development Mailing List <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Delivery-date: Fri, 26 Jan 2007 02:18:49 -0800
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <C1DF84FF.7D57%Keir.Fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
List-help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>
List-post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Thread-index: AcdBMTKDcN+Ii60kEduhMgANk04WTAAAFCIwAABPQvoAAAwCoA==
Thread-topic: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] 32on64 call gate support
 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Keir Fraser [mailto:Keir.Fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxx] 
> Sent: 26 January 2007 10:14
> To: Petersson, Mats
> Cc: Xen Development Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] 32on64 call gate support
> 
> On 26/1/07 10:07 am, "Petersson, Mats" <Mats.Petersson@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> >> Do we know that anyone uses 64-bit call gates? I would 
> have thought it
> >> unlikely.
> > 
> > I agree, it's VERY unlikely that anyone uses call-gates in 
> 64-bit mode.
> > There are other, better, ways to do system calls, including the
> > dedicated SYSCALL instruction. Since 64-bit code is "new", 
> it's unlikely
> > to use old ways of doing things "just because there was nothing else
> > around at the time".
> 
> Of course, it begs the question why call gates weren't 
> stripped from long
> mode along with other ancient architectural baggage.

Yeah, well... Actually, there may be a good reason for call-gates: If
you use call-gates correctly, you could avoid having one arugment that
is "which system call", but rather set up three dozen call-gates for
your three-dozen system calls - so that may be what they were preserving
it for, along with your suggestion below about old-OS support. There are
a few more possible call-gates than other methods of system-call, even
if they are not quite "unlimited". [Bear in mind that I'm NOT a
chip-architect, so I don't know why they kept some things and removed
others, aside from the "prefix" clean-up]

> 
> Perhaps the idea was to allow compat-mode applications 
> relying on call gates
> to be supported? So the OS would be responsible for 
> allocating 64-bit call
> gates instead of 32-bit call gates?
> 
> Anyhow, this is a bridge we should probably only cross if we 
> come to it.

Definitely my opinion too. 

--
Mats
> 
>  -- Keir
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 



_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>