> To: Zou, Nanhai
> Cc: Andi Kleen; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org;
Siddha,
> Suresh B
> Subject: Re: [discuss] [Patch] X86_64 TASK_SIZE cleanup - more
comments
>
>
> Another comment:
>
> In general I am not too happy about the variable size TASK_SIZE.
inux-kernel@vger.kernel.org;
Siddha,
> Suresh B
> Subject: Re: [discuss] [Patch] X86_64 TASK_SIZE cleanup
>
> On Thu, Apr 21, 2005 at 01:17:40AM +0800, Zou, Nanhai wrote:
> > Hi Andi,
> >What is your comment on this patch?
>
> There is at least one wrong change i
Another comment:
In general I am not too happy about the variable size TASK_SIZE.
There was a patch for this earlier, but it broke 32bit emulation
completely. And I think it needs auditing of all uses of TASK_SIZE,
because I suspect there are more bugs lurking in it.
The way hugetlb etc. mmap
On Thu, Apr 21, 2005 at 01:17:40AM +0800, Zou, Nanhai wrote:
> Hi Andi,
>What is your comment on this patch?
There is at least one wrong change in there, you have a check
for test_thread_flag(TIF_IA32) && (flags & MAP_32BIT)
and that is wrong because MAP_32BIT is used from 64bit code
-Andi
On Thu, Apr 21, 2005 at 01:17:40AM +0800, Zou, Nanhai wrote:
Hi Andi,
What is your comment on this patch?
There is at least one wrong change in there, you have a check
for test_thread_flag(TIF_IA32) (flags MAP_32BIT)
and that is wrong because MAP_32BIT is used from 64bit code
-Andi
-
To
Another comment:
In general I am not too happy about the variable size TASK_SIZE.
There was a patch for this earlier, but it broke 32bit emulation
completely. And I think it needs auditing of all uses of TASK_SIZE,
because I suspect there are more bugs lurking in it.
The way hugetlb etc. mmap
,
Suresh B
Subject: Re: [discuss] [Patch] X86_64 TASK_SIZE cleanup
On Thu, Apr 21, 2005 at 01:17:40AM +0800, Zou, Nanhai wrote:
Hi Andi,
What is your comment on this patch?
There is at least one wrong change in there, you have a check
for test_thread_flag(TIF_IA32) (flags MAP_32BIT
Cc: Andi Kleen; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org;
Siddha,
Suresh B
Subject: Re: [discuss] [Patch] X86_64 TASK_SIZE cleanup - more
comments
Another comment:
In general I am not too happy about the variable size TASK_SIZE.
There was a patch for this earlier, but it broke
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; Siddha, Suresh B
> Subject: RE: [discuss] [Patch] X86_64 TASK_SIZE cleanup
>
>
> When a 32bit program is mapping a lot of hugepage vm_areas,
> hugetlb_get_unmapped_area may search beyond 4G, then the program will
get a
> SIGFA
]; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; Siddha, Suresh B
Subject: RE: [discuss] [Patch] X86_64 TASK_SIZE cleanup
When a 32bit program is mapping a lot of hugepage vm_areas,
hugetlb_get_unmapped_area may search beyond 4G, then the program will
get a
SIGFAULT instead of an errno of ENOMEM.
This patch
> -Original Message-
> From: Andi Kleen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Monday, April 18, 2005 5:06 PM
> To: Zou, Nanhai
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Andi Kleen; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org;
Siddha,
> Suresh B
> Subject: Re: [discuss] [Patch] X86_64 TASK_SIZE cleanup
>
On Sat, Apr 16, 2005 at 09:34:25AM +0800, Zou, Nanhai wrote:
>
> Hi,
>This patch will clean up the X86_64 compatibility mode TASK_SIZE
> define thus fix some bugs found in X86_64 compatibility mode program.
Fix what bugs exactly? Please a detailed description.
-Andi
-
To unsubscribe from
On Sat, Apr 16, 2005 at 09:34:25AM +0800, Zou, Nanhai wrote:
Hi,
This patch will clean up the X86_64 compatibility mode TASK_SIZE
define thus fix some bugs found in X86_64 compatibility mode program.
Fix what bugs exactly? Please a detailed description.
-Andi
-
To unsubscribe from this
-Original Message-
From: Andi Kleen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, April 18, 2005 5:06 PM
To: Zou, Nanhai
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Andi Kleen; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org;
Siddha,
Suresh B
Subject: Re: [discuss] [Patch] X86_64 TASK_SIZE cleanup
On Sat, Apr 16, 2005 at 09:34
14 matches
Mail list logo
