Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261223AbVDZB5l (ORCPT ); Mon, 25 Apr 2005 21:57:41 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261248AbVDZB5l (ORCPT ); Mon, 25 Apr 2005 21:57:41 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([66.187.233.31]:48280 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261223AbVDZB5i (ORCPT ); Mon, 25 Apr 2005 21:57:38 -0400 Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2005 18:57:31 -0700 Message-Id: <200504260157.j3Q1vV6M011223@magilla.sf.frob.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Roland McGrath To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Andi Kleen , Andrew Morton , Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86_64: handle iret faults better In-Reply-To: Linus Torvalds's message of Monday, 25 April 2005 15:51:32 -0700 X-Fcc: ~/Mail/linus X-Shopping-List: (1) Elevated condiments (2) Spherical dogs (3) Chic winches (4) Igneous gratuitous apparitions (5) Geopolitical malnutrition Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 546 Lines: 13 What would you think about a general hack to let given fixup table entries say the code wants the trap and error info made available (pushed on the stack or whatever)? Conversely, would there be any harm in always setting ->thread.error_code and ->thread.trap_no for a kernel trap? Thanks, Roland - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/