[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1200622862.5724.106.camel@brick>
Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2008 18:21:02 -0800
From: Harvey Harrison <harvey.harrison@...il.com>
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Cc: Roland McGrath <roland@...hat.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: Use v8086_mode helper, trivial unification
On Thu, 2008-01-17 at 20:36 -0500, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> Roland McGrath wrote:
> > It's indeed true that &pt_regs is truly the esp value for x86-32
> > kernel-mode trap frames. Because this nonobvious calculation is
> > only right for a kernel mode pt_regs and not for a user-mode one,
> > I think it would be better to use a name for the inline/macro that
> > makes this quite clear, rather than one so generic as "stack_addr".
>
> Indeed. This was certainly highly nonobvious in the current code.
>
What do you think of:
/*
* (unsigned long)regs looks strange, but it's correct for x86_32. x86_32 CPUs
* don't save the ss and esp registers if the CPU is already in kernel mode
* when it traps. So ®s happens to be esp. Valid only for kernel-mode
* pt_regs.
*/
static inline unsigned long stack_pointer(struct pt_regs *regs)
{
#ifdef CONFIG_X86_32
return (unsigned long)regs;
#else
return regs->sp;
#endif
}
Harvey
--
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