On Sunday 10 September 2006 15:26, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Andi Kleen <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > Basically, non-atomic setup of basic architecture state _is_ going to
> > > be a nightmare, lockdep or not, especially if it uses common
> > > infrastructure like 'current', spin_lock() or even something as simple
> > > as C functions. (for example the stack-footprint tracer was once hit by
> > > this weakness of the x86_64 code)
> >
> > I disagree with that. The nightmare is putting stuff that needs so
> > much infrastructure into the most basic operations.
>
> ugh, "having a working current" is "so much infrastructure" ??
Together with stacktrace the infrastructure needed is quite
considerable.
>
> the i686 PDA patches introduce tons of early_current() uses. While i
> like the new PDA code, its bootstrap (like x86_64's PDA bootstrap) is
> too fragile in my opinion, and it will regularly hit instrumenting
> patches.
Or the instrumentation patches just always need to check
some global variable. Maybe system_state could be extended or something.
>
> Perhaps the early setup code (if we really want to do it all in C)
Sorry but moving it into assembler would be just crazy.
> should be moved into 32-bit early boot userspace code (like
> compressed/misc.c) and it will thus not depend on any kernel
> infrastructure.
Ok I guess it would make sense to add a i386_start_kernel to i386 and
initialize the boot PDA there. I would also move early_cpu_init
into there because that also avoids quite some mess later.
-Andi
-
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/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
