Re: RFC: i386: kill !4KSTACKS

[Bill Davidsen]

Jan Kiszka wrote:
> 2005/9/6, Giridhar Pemmasani <giri@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
>
> > Jan Kiszka wrote:
> >
> >
> > > The only way I see is to switch stacks back on ndiswrapper API entry.
> > > But managing all those stacks correctly is challenging, as you will
> > > likely not want to create a new stack on each switching point. Rather,
> >
> > This is what I had in mind before I saw this thread here. I, in fact, did
> > some work along those lines, but it is even more complicated than you
> > mentioned here: Windows uses different calling conventions (STDCALL,
> > FASTCALL, CDECL) so switching stacks by copying arguments/results gets
> > complicated. So I gave up on that approach. For X86-64 drivers we use
> > similar approach, but for that there is only one calling convention and we
> > don't need to switch stacks, but reshuffle arguments on stack / in
> > registers.
> >
> > I am still hoping that Andi's approach is possible (I don't understand how
> > we can make kernel see current info from private stack).
>
>
> The more I think about this the more it becomes clear that this path
> will be too winding, especially when compared to the effort needed to
> patch 8K (or more) back into the kernel as an intermediate workaround.

Is there a technical reason ("hard to implement" is a practical reason) 
why all stacks need to be the same size?

--
   -bill davidsen (davidsen@xxxxxxx)
"The secret to procrastination is to put things off until the
 last possible moment - but no longer"  -me
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/