Sergey Bugaev, le lun. 20 févr. 2023 20:10:29 +0300, a ecrit: > - the implementation does not seem to actually switch stacks (in fact, > I have removed the unused switch_stacks function in the last commit) > -- so the "gets called with the stack just as the application's entry > point will see it" property may not be important anymore?
That's possible, yes. > So my thinking goes, why don't we just hook into _dl_start, which > already has this very pointer? And in fact, _dl_start calls > _dl_sysdep_start, for which there is already a Hurd version. Can't we > just call our logic from there, and not worry about the stack layout > and overwriting return addresses? Possibly, yes. > That would work for the SHARED case; we also need to do something for > the static case. In that case, we are invoked by static-start.S; do I > understand it right that the argc/argv/whatever is still located > on-stack even on x86_64 in this case, and not passed in registers > according to the calling convention? I don't know. But you can check on Linux, we'll probably want to use the same ABI. Samuel
