Re: Single-address space, no processes?

2016-01-07 Thread Jamie Lokier
Matt Johnston wrote: > It mightn't be necessary to pass pointers around everywhere if > ses/svr_ses/cli_ses could be thread-local pointer variables - how widely > supported is thread-local storage? If you can get a "current thread id" or set one "thread-local value", you can make thread-local

Re: Single-address space, no processes?

2016-01-05 Thread Matt Johnston
Hi Sebastian, I'd be interesting in merging changes upstream, I think it would be of interest to a few people. It would need to be under a similar license to the current code. Currently the session state is kept in ses, svr_ses, and cli_ses global variables (all structs defined in session.h).

Re: Single-address space, no processes?

2016-01-04 Thread Sebastian Huber
Hello, thanks for the hints. So, running dropbear in a single-address space and no process environment seems to be doable. However, it requires probably some possible large code modifications, e.g. * encapsulate the global state in a context structure and pass a pointer to this structure

Re: Single-address space, no processes?

2015-12-29 Thread Matt Johnston
Hi Sebastian, Dropbear probably won't fit without some modifications, though likely wouldn't be that hard to get working with only a single connection at a time. There's a global state variable, and may be a few other assumptions that the vforked child is going to exec() (like uClinux). Recent

Single-address space, no processes?

2015-12-23 Thread Sebastian Huber
Hello, I would like to use SSH to do some remote administration for an application running with the RTEMS real-time operating system. In this environment we have no virtual memory and user and kernel space separation. So this is like an application running in kernel mode only. Is it in