On Tuesday 25 May 2010 04:40:01 Philippe De Muyter wrote: > On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 11:19:43AM +1000, Greg Ungerer wrote: > > Philippe De Muyter wrote: > >> On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 11:29:50AM +1000, Greg Ungerer wrote: > >> [...] > >> > >>> +#else > >>> +#define TASK_SIZE (0xFFFFFFFFUL) > >>> +#endif > >> > >> Because of do_getname() : > >> len = TASK_SIZE - (unsigned long) filename; > >> > >> we should rather have > >> > >> #define TASK_SIZE (0x100000000ull) > > > > I see what you mean. But in practice here I don't think it matters. > > Can no process have its stack allocated in the last block, and hence have > some argv[i] put in the last addresses, with the terminating '\0' at > 0xffffffff ?
that depends on the processor. on Blackfin systems, the last 4 megs are aways reserved in hardware, so no, this couldnt happen there. -mike
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ uClinux-dev mailing list uClinux-dev@uclinux.org http://mailman.uclinux.org/mailman/listinfo/uclinux-dev This message was resent by uclinux-dev@uclinux.org To unsubscribe see: http://mailman.uclinux.org/mailman/options/uclinux-dev
