[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4CCEB83C-FBCF-4095-8770-892387438060@zytor.com>
Date: Fri, 17 Jun 2016 16:10:59 -0700
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To: Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
CC: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [off-list] a path toward killing thread_info
On June 17, 2016 4:04:31 PM PDT, Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk> wrote:
>On Fri, Jun 17, 2016 at 03:41:49PM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>
>> PeterZ, I'm thinking of adding task_ti_flags_ptr to directly find the
>> ti flags word given a task_struct * so the scheduler can use it.
>Does
>> that seem reasonable to you?
>
>What are you trying to do? Merge task_struct and thread_info?
Yes.
I did a half-finished patchset to do this once, in that I defined accessor functions which used container_of instead of pointers on architectures where this merge was enabled.
--
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse brevity and formatting.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists