Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Fri, 15 Feb 2002 07:21:39 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Fri, 15 Feb 2002 07:21:20 -0500 Received: from smtpzilla2.xs4all.nl ([194.109.127.138]:22800 "EHLO smtpzilla2.xs4all.nl") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Fri, 15 Feb 2002 07:21:09 -0500 Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2002 13:20:44 +0100 (CET) From: Roman Zippel X-X-Sender: To: David Howells cc: Jeff Garzik , Linus Torvalds , , "David S. Miller" , , Subject: Re: [PATCH] move task_struct allocation to arch In-Reply-To: <23458.1013773072@warthog.cambridge.redhat.com> 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 Hi, On Fri, 15 Feb 2002, David Howells wrote: > > That wouldn't be a problem, if ia32 added the needed infrastructure to > > calculate the structure offsets. > > But the offsets aren't fixed. The task structure does not lie adjacent to the > thread_info structure. That's not the problem, I meant this sentence: "This led to Linus requesting that everything that entry.S needs to access be separated out into another structure." Splitting the task structure and the stack page is fine. Keeping the most important fields in the stack page is fine too, if the architecture requires it. But the decision what goes into thread_info, should not be made only to avoid access to task_struct from entry.S. bye, Roman - 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/