[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2006 11:58:30 +1000
From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>
To: Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@...oo.com.au>
Cc: Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>, Hugh Dickins <hugh@...itas.com>,
Linux Memory Management <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>, Jes Sorensen <jes@....com>,
Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Subject: Re: faults and signals
> Yep, the flags field should be able to do that for you. Since we have
> the handle_mm_fault wrapper for machine faults, it isn't too hard to
> change the arguments: we should probably turn `write_access` into a
> flag so we don't have to push too many arguments onto the stack.
>
> This way we can distinguish get_user_pages faults. And your
> architecture will have to switch over to using __handle_mm_fault, and
> distinguish kernel faults. Something like that?
Yes. Tho it's also fairly easy to just add an argument to the wrapper
and fix all archs... but yeah, I will play around.
Ben.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists