From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1423097AbXBVAHg (ORCPT ); Wed, 21 Feb 2007 19:07:36 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1423268AbXBVAHg (ORCPT ); Wed, 21 Feb 2007 19:07:36 -0500 Received: from smtp001.mail.ukl.yahoo.com ([217.12.11.32]:29615 "HELO smtp001.mail.ukl.yahoo.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1423097AbXBVAHf (ORCPT ); Wed, 21 Feb 2007 19:07:35 -0500 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.it; h=Received:X-YMail-OSG:From:To:Subject:Date:User-Agent:Cc:References:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Disposition:Message-Id; b=hSRs7b9I40/w+cSKWJyju75McwmHUzdG0hNneS5NWlYfWV4Q/PQlUcjcMFwNi4RGczraxPAEgjmq6cWVNqKjEUwF1zYFshK8WOkkr7w0HsM3T6SI9kPocUTggL6/Y+HiR/KCm4vAvkXWUiLs5pgC2NlzLwNVkXzCXuobUlKH5rI= ; X-YMail-OSG: RsJzpFUVM1kUgr7uIQw7cqI_cvVWtnTfqhu_p9DbFd_OTqB_uTVp7_ksVYvDway027LCROAVsGIY56O6jMiRnI.w.p3m775G9vAPVFEF1zvNDsYaozuItdfp2aawGFno1wz0ZcHXSB84 From: Blaisorblade To: user-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: [uml-devel] [PATCH 2/3] UML - x86_64 thread fixes Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2007 01:07:30 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.5 Cc: Jeff Dike , akpm@osdl.org, wstearns@pobox.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <200702082157.l18LvVFB007602@ccure.user-mode-linux.org> In-Reply-To: <200702082157.l18LvVFB007602@ccure.user-mode-linux.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200702220107.30766.blaisorblade@yahoo.it> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thursday 08 February 2007 22:57, Jeff Dike wrote: > x86_64 needs some TLS fixes. What was missing was remembering the > child thread id during clone and stuffing it into the child during > each context switch. > > The %fs value is stored separately in the thread structure since the > host controls what effect it has on the actual register file. The > host also needs to store it in its own thread struct, so we need the > value kept outside the register file. Is there any reason for avoiding this treatment to %gs, apart that TLS code usually does not need it, even if the API allows for it to exist? I _do_ believe this patch fixes bug which can be tested (not verified everything), even if I wonder why you didn't look at the patch I sent to you time ago (I hadn't finished it, in truth, but there was most stuff - it had problems I couldn't debug at that time). -- Inform me of my mistakes, so I can add them to my list! Paolo Giarrusso, aka Blaisorblade http://www.user-mode-linux.org/~blaisorblade Chiacchiera con i tuoi amici in tempo reale! http://it.yahoo.com/mail_it/foot/*http://it.messenger.yahoo.com