On Wednesday 09 June 2010, Sukadev Bhattiprolu wrote:
> Albert and Randy point out that this would require #ifdefs in the
> application code that intends to be portable across say IA64 and x86.
>
> Can we instead have all architectures specify [base, size] ?
No objections from me on that.
> Peter, Arnd, Roland - do you have any concerns with requiring all
> architectures to specify the stack to eclone() as [base, offset]
I can't see why that would be a problem.
It's consistent with the sigaltstack interface we already have.
Thanks,
Roland
___
On 06/09/2010 11:14 AM, Sukadev Bhattiprolu wrote:
> |
> | Even for x86, it's an easier API. Callers would be specifying
> | two numbers they already have: the argument and return value
> | for malloc. Currently the numbers must be added together,
> | destroying information, except on hppa (must n
Albert Cahalan [acaha...@gmail.com] wrote:
| On Tue, Jun 1, 2010 at 9:38 PM, Sukadev Bhattiprolu
| wrote:
| > | Come on, seriously, you know it's ia64 and hppa that
| > | have issues. Maybe the nommu ports also have issues.
| > |
| > | The only portable way to specify the stack is base and offset,
On Tue, Jun 1, 2010 at 9:38 PM, Sukadev Bhattiprolu
wrote:
> | Come on, seriously, you know it's ia64 and hppa that
> | have issues. Maybe the nommu ports also have issues.
> |
> | The only portable way to specify the stack is base and offset,
> | with flags or magic values for "share" and "kernel
On Tue, Jun 1, 2010 at 9:38 PM, Sukadev Bhattiprolu
wrote:
> | Come on, seriously, you know it's ia64 and hppa that
> | have issues. Maybe the nommu ports also have issues.
> |
> | The only portable way to specify the stack is base and offset,
> | with flags or magic values for "share" and "kernel
On Tue, Jun 1, 2010 at 9:38 PM, Sukadev Bhattiprolu
wrote:
> | Come on, seriously, you know it's ia64 and hppa that
> | have issues. Maybe the nommu ports also have issues.
> |
> | The only portable way to specify the stack is base and offset,
> | with flags or magic values for "share" and "kernel
| Come on, seriously, you know it's ia64 and hppa that
| have issues. Maybe the nommu ports also have issues.
|
| The only portable way to specify the stack is base and offset,
| with flags or magic values for "share" and "kernel managed".
Ah, ok, we have not yet ported to IA64 and I see now wher
On Tue, Jun 1, 2010 at 3:32 PM, Sukadev Bhattiprolu
wrote:
> Albert Cahalan [acaha...@gmail.com] wrote:
> | Sukadev Bhattiprolu writes:
> | > Randy Dunlap [randy.dunlap at oracle.com] wrote:
> | >>> base of the region allocated for stack. These architectures
> | >>> must pass in the size of the s
Albert Cahalan [acaha...@gmail.com] wrote:
| Sukadev Bhattiprolu writes:
|
| > Randy Dunlap [randy.dunlap at oracle.com] wrote:
| >>> base of the region allocated for stack. These architectures
| >>> must pass in the size of the stack-region in ->child_stack_size.
| >>
| >>
Sukadev Bhattiprolu writes:
> Randy Dunlap [randy.dunlap at oracle.com] wrote:
>>> base of the region allocated for stack. These architectures
>>> must pass in the size of the stack-region in ->child_stack_size.
>>
>> stack region
>>
>> Seems unfortunate that differen
Randy Dunlap [randy.dun...@oracle.com] wrote:
| > + base of the region allocated for stack. These architectures
| > + must pass in the size of the stack-region in ->child_stack_size.
|
|stack region
|
| Seems unfortunate that differe
On Sat, 1 May 2010 10:14:53 -0400 Oren Laadan wrote:
> From: Sukadev Bhattiprolu
>
> This gives a brief overview of the eclone() system call. We should
> eventually describe more details in existing clone(2) man page or in
> a new man page.
>
> Signed-off-by: Sukadev Bhattiprolu
> Acked-by:
From: Sukadev Bhattiprolu
This gives a brief overview of the eclone() system call. We should
eventually describe more details in existing clone(2) man page or in
a new man page.
Changelog[v13]:
- [Nathan Lynch, Serge Hallyn] Rename ->child_stack_base to
->child_stack and ensur
14 matches
Mail list logo
