Skip to content

Conversation

@zetanumbers
Copy link
Contributor

@zetanumbers zetanumbers commented Jul 13, 2022

This is possible due to 9546fa1 initialization a vfpu enabled thread inside of the module_start. It is unsafe to get outside of vfpu context.

This is possible due to 9546fa1, which initializes a vfpu enabled thread inside of the `module_start`. It is unsafe to reach vfpu disabled execution context.
@MaxVerevkin
Copy link
Contributor

But how is 9546fa1 relevant here? vfpu was enabled before it too.

@zetanumbers
Copy link
Contributor Author

But how is 9546fa1 relevant here? vfpu was enabled before it too.

Um, yeah. Anyway we discussed this on discord and decided this is an appropriate change.

@sajattack
Copy link
Collaborator

But how is 9546fa1 relevant here? vfpu was enabled before it too.

This is where the change actually occurred. Might've been some confusion in our discussion. de9ee9d#diff-05072a5ebf71822998be8bb7f33b844dc8b68dcb256562c5291044373a6125faR220

@zetanumbers
Copy link
Contributor Author

Hm, after some thought i am not sure if we can make these functions safe. What about staticlib, when rust doesn't define module_start?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants