george anzinger writes:
> Uh... I do know about this map, but I wonder if it is at all needed.
> What is the real difference between a logical cpu and the physical one.
> Or is this only interesting if the machine is not Smp, i.e. all the cpus
> are not the same? It just seems to me that intro
Hubertus Franke writes:
> I think that all data accesses particularly to __aligned_data
> should be performed through logical ids. There's a lot of remapping
> going on, due to the mix of logical and physical IDs.
>
> If indeed the physical numbers are sparse (like we had on a 4x4
> NUMA system)
george anzinger writes:
> All that is cool. Still, most places we don't really address the
> processor, so the logical cpu number is all we need. Places like
> sched_yield, for example, should be using this, not the actual number,
> which IMO should only be used when, for some reason, we NEED th
() to correctly save all the fields in the
sigmask_t struct, and adds unsafe_put_compat_sigmask() to handle the
compat_sigset_t cases.
Signed-off-by: Walt Drummond
---
arch/x86/kernel/signal.c | 13 ++---
1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/signal.c
dinate libc and kernel changes super tightly to pull this off),
and any change in the size of struct rt_sigframe would break backwards
compatibility with older binaries, is that correct?
Thanks, appreciate the help here.
--Walt
On Sat, Nov 28, 2020 at 6:19 PM Walt Drummond wrote:
>
>
Got it. Thanks again Al.
On Sat, Nov 28, 2020 at 7:28 PM Al Viro wrote:
>
> On Sat, Nov 28, 2020 at 06:19:31PM -0800, Walt Drummond wrote:
> > Thanks Al. I want to understand the nuance, so please bear with me as I
> > reason this out. The cast in stone nature of this is du
6 matches
Mail list logo
