search for: rex64

...libc. It is already allocated before the JIT'd code runs. The JIT'd code just needs to refer to it. OK. Are we generating generic dynamic code to do so? It will look like .byte 0x66 leaq x at tlsgd(%rip),%rdi ; R_X86_64_TLSGD to symbol x (MCJIT has to create a GOT entry) .word 0x6666 rex64 call __tls get_addr at plt ; R_X86_64_PLT32 to __tls_get_addr (MCJIT has to create a GOT and a PLT entry) This should work from any place in memory. I wouldn't be surprised if these relocations are not implemented yet, but that should be all that is needed to get tls working. Cheers, Raf...

On 22 May 2013, at 13:23, Rafael Espíndola <rafael.espindola at gmail.com> wrote: > Why the private message? If unintentional, please forward this to the list. Ooops, forgot to hit reply-all. Didn't the LLVM lists used to default to reply-to-list behaviour? > So, the JIT is analogous to dlopen, so it should be using general > dynamic and local dynamic models. It is only the

The first patch really isn''t as much of a follow-up than what triggered the security issues to be noticed in the first place. 1: x86: preserve FPU selectors for 32-bit guest code 2: x86: fix XCR0 handling 3: x86/xsave: adjust state management 4: x86/fxsave: bring in line with recent xsave adjustments The first two I would see as candidates for 4.3 (as well as subsequent backporting,

...,0 +lgdt_descr: + .word LAST_RESERVED_GDT_BYTE + .quad gdt_table - FIRST_RESERVED_GDT_BYTE + +wakeup_64: + lgdt lgdt_descr(%rip) + mov $(__HYPERVISOR_DS64), %eax + mov %eax, %ds + + # long jump to return point, with cs reload + rex64 ljmp *ret_point(%rip) + + .align 8 +ret_point: + .quad __ret_point + .word __HYPERVISOR_CS64 + +#else /* !defined(__x86_64__) */ + lgdt gdt_descr + mov $(__HYPERVISOR_DS), %eax + mov %eax, %ds + + ljmp $(__HYPERVISOR_CS), $__ret_...

Hi David, I believe that assertion indicates that something didn't get loaded into the lower 2GB of address space. That is, the memory manager isn't allocating memory in that range. I'm sure there must be a way to allocate memory in that range on FreeBSD. The system loader has to do it, right? I just don't know what makes it happen. -Andy -----Original Message----- From: Dr