Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1756103Ab2BHEAk (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Tue, 7 Feb 2012 23:00:40 -0500
Received: from mail-gx0-f174.google.com ([209.85.161.174]:35158 "EHLO
	mail-gx0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1753935Ab2BHEAh (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Tue, 7 Feb 2012 23:00:37 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAAHN_R0+ExGcdpLM7KwC_KsPOemVOiRrmyWcowiu5_cWW3BPLQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20120116163106.GC7180@jl-vm1.vm.bytemark.co.uk>
	<1326776095-2629-1-git-send-email-siddhesh.poyarekar@gmail.com>
	<CAAHN_R2g9zaujw30+zLf91AGDHNqE6HDc8Z4yJbrzgJcJYFkXg@mail.gmail.com>
	<4F2B02BC.8010308@gmail.com>
	<CAAHN_R0O7a+RX7BDfas3+vC+mnQpp0h3y4bBa1u4T-Jt=S9J_w@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAHGf_=qA6EFue2-mNUg9udWV4xSx86XQsnyGV07hfZOUx6_egw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAAHN_R0+ExGcdpLM7KwC_KsPOemVOiRrmyWcowiu5_cWW3BPLQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 8 Feb 2012 09:30:36 +0530
Message-ID: <CAAHN_R0N=3J4=VqvDsGB=_2Ln9yKBjOevW2=_UAMBK1pGepqvA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [RESEND][PATCH] Mark thread stack correctly in proc/<pid>/maps
From: Siddhesh Poyarekar <siddhesh.poyarekar@gmail.com>
To: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@gmail.com>
Cc: Jamie Lokier <jamie@shareable.org>, linux-mm@kvack.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Alexander Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
        linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
        Michael Kerrisk <mtk.manpages@gmail.com>, linux-man@vger.kernel.org,
        Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1736
Lines: 41

On Sat, Feb 4, 2012 at 12:04 AM, Siddhesh Poyarekar
<siddhesh.poyarekar@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 1:31 PM, KOSAKI Motohiro
> <kosaki.motohiro@gmail.com> wrote:
>> The fact is, now process stack and pthread stack clearly behave
>> different dance. libc don't expect pthread stack grow automatically.
>> So, your patch will break userland. Just only change display thing.
<snip>
> I have also dropped an email on the libc-alpha list here to solicit
> comments from libc maintainers on this:
>
> http://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/2012-02/msg00036.html
>

Kosaki-san, your suggestion of adding an extra flag seems like the
right way to go about this based on the discussion on libc-alpha,
specifically, your point about pthread_getattr_np() -- it may not be a
standard, but it's a breakage anyway. However, looking at the vm_flags
options in mm.h, it looks like the entire 32-bit space has been
exhausted for the flag value. The vm_flags is an unsigned long, so it
ought to take 8 bytes on a 64-bit system, but 32-bit systems will be
left behind.

So there are two options for this:

1) make vm_flags 64-bit for all arches. This will cause ABI breakage
on 32-bit systems, so any external drivers will have to be rebuilt
2) Implement this patch for 64-bit only by defining the new flag only
for 64-bit. 32-bit systems behave as is

Which of these would be better? I prefer the latter because it looks
like the path of least breakage.

-- 
Siddhesh Poyarekar
http://siddhesh.in
--
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/