On Thu, Nov 09, 2006 at 10:18:53AM -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> Hmm, Andi,
>
> Should this be more like what is done in x86? Although this isn't a major
> bug or anything, would it be cleaner. For example doing:
>
> @@ -836,11 +836,15 @@ gdt:
> .word 0x9200 # data read/write
> .word 0x00CF # granularity = 4096, 386
> # (+5th nibble of limit)
> +gdt_end:
> + .align 4
> +
> + .word 0 # alignment byte
> idt_48:
> .word 0 # idt limit = 0
> .word 0, 0 # idt base = 0L
> gdt_48:
> - .word 0x8000 # gdt limit=2048,
> + .word gdt_end - gdt - 1 # gdt limit=2048,
> # 256 GDT entries
>
> .word 0, 0 # gdt base (filled in
>
> instead?
Hi!
Maybe you should consider 16-byte aligning the gdt table too, like
i386 does? It doesn't hurt, and as per the comment in the i386-file
"16 byte aligment is recommended by intel."
Greetings,
Alexander van Heukelum
> If so, I can send you another patch that does this. Will need to test it
> first.
>
> -- Steve
-
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]
