To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
From: Giridhar Pemmasani <giri@lmc.cs.sunysb.edu>
Subject: Re: RFC: i386: kill !4KSTACKS
Date: Tue, 06 Sep 2005 09:25:55 -0400
Message-ID: <dfk5cp$19p$1@sea.gmane.org>
References: <20050904145129.53730.qmail@web50202.mail.yahoo.com> <1125854398.23858.51.camel@localhost.localdomain> <p73aciqrev0.fsf@verdi.suse.de>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
User-Agent: KNode/0.9.90
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1036
Lines: 19

Andi Kleen wrote:

> AFAIK with interrupt stacks it shouldn't be a big issue to switch
> to a private bigger stack. ndiswrapper just needs to have its own private
> way to do "current" which accesses thread_info at the bottom of the stack.

I am developer of ndiswrapper and just caught up with this discussion. I am
interested in providing private stack for ndiswrapper. I am not familiar
with linux kernel internals to understand your proposal. Could you give me
details please: If you can give a rough sketch of idea, I can implement it.
Better yet, if you (or anyone else) can provide an implementation (not
necessarily against ndsiwrapper, but a proof of concept), it will be
greatly appreciated - this should also help any other projects that need
more than 4k stack.

Thanks,
Giri.


-
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/