* Davide Libenzi <davidel@xmailserver.org> wrote:
> My point is, the syslet infrastructure is expensive for the kernel in
> terms of compat, [...]
it is not. Today i've implemented 64-bit syslets on x86_64 and
32-bit-on-64-bit compat syslets. Both the 64-bit and the 32-bit syslet
(and threadlet) binaries work just fine on a 64-bit kernel, and they
share 99% of the infrastructure. There's only a single #ifdef
CONFIG_COMPAT in kernel/async.c:
#ifdef CONFIG_COMPAT
asmlinkage struct syslet_uatom __user *
compat_sys_async_exec(struct syslet_uatom __user *uatom,
struct async_head_user __user *ahu)
{
return __sys_async_exec(uatom, ahu, &compat_sys_call_table,
compat_NR_syscalls);
}
#endif
Even mixed-mode syslets should work (although i havent specifically
tested them), where the head switches between 64-bit and 32-bit mode and
submits syslets from both 64-bit and from 32-bit mode, and at the same
time there might be both 64-bit and 32-bit syslets 'in flight'.
But i'm happy to change the syslet API in any sane way, and did so based
on feedback from Jens who is actually using them.
Ingo
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
