Matt Thomas <m...@3am-software.com> wrote: > If we are going to get rid of swappable uareas, then we should go all > the way. > > <...> > > The separate lwp pool should go away and the lwp should just be placed > at the bottom of the uarea followed by the pcb. l_addr should be > renamed l_pcb. > > <...>
Here is the patch placing struct lwp in the uarea: http://www.netbsd.org/~rmind/uarea_lwp.diff Few concerns: - Mess of macros in sys/proc.h, I think __HAVE_UAREA_TOP_LAYOUT should rather be avoided by uarea layout unification. - Perhaps we should revisit zombie LWP state? Separate uarea allocation might be useful for out-of-memory case. Thoughts? -- Mindaugas