Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Fri, 30 Nov 2001 18:42:59 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Fri, 30 Nov 2001 18:42:49 -0500 Received: from mail.xmailserver.org ([208.129.208.52]:26630 "EHLO mail.xmailserver.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Fri, 30 Nov 2001 18:42:33 -0500 Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2001 15:53:02 -0800 (PST) From: Davide Libenzi X-X-Sender: davide@blue1.dev.mcafeelabs.com To: Alan Cox cc: lkml , Shuji YAMAMURA Subject: Re: [PATCH] task_struct colouring ... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, 30 Nov 2001, Alan Cox wrote: > > Looking at both the Manfred and Fujitsu patches I propose this new version > > for task struct colouring. > > The patch from Manfred is too architecture dependent ( cr2 ) and storing > > extra stuff in CPU registers is not IMHO a good idea. > > Well the whole "current" handling is entirely architecture dependant anyway. > On most saner platforms current is a global register variable (the wonders > of gcc) and the whole problem simply isnt there So You like the idea of stocking structure pointers inside CPU registers or I missed Your point ? The proposed implementation is "uniform" between architectures, that's my point. What for CPUs that cannot offer "free" registers ? What if someone else, following the example, start stocking some other pointer in free registers ? - Davide - 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/