Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > linux.kernel > #1188695 > unrolled thread

Re: [PATCH 4/7] x86/vm86: Move vm86 fields out of thread_struct

Started byIngo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
First post2015-07-21 08:30 +0200
Last post2015-07-21 08:40 +0200
Articles 4 — 2 participants

Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.


Contents

  Re: [PATCH 4/7] x86/vm86: Move vm86 fields out of thread_struct Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> - 2015-07-21 08:30 +0200
    Re: [PATCH 4/7] x86/vm86: Move vm86 fields out of thread_struct Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net> - 2015-07-21 08:40 +0200
      Re: [PATCH 4/7] x86/vm86: Move vm86 fields out of thread_struct Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> - 2015-07-21 08:40 +0200
    Re: [PATCH 4/7] x86/vm86: Move vm86 fields out of thread_struct Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> - 2015-07-21 08:40 +0200

#1188695 — Re: [PATCH 4/7] x86/vm86: Move vm86 fields out of thread_struct

FromIngo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Date2015-07-21 08:30 +0200
SubjectRe: [PATCH 4/7] x86/vm86: Move vm86 fields out of thread_struct
Message-ID<pOzdT-bd-9@gated-at.bofh.it>
* Brian Gerst <brgerst@gmail.com> wrote:

> Allocate a separate structure for the vm86 fields.

Why is this allocated dynamically? This structure is not very large, and a hole in 
thread_struct isn't that big of an issue - compared to additional fragility 
introduced by the (mostly untested by normal apps) dynamic allocation here ...

I don't mind the introduction of the sub-structure in itself, but please embedd it 
in thread_struct.

Thanks,

	Ingo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]


#1188698

FromAndy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>
Date2015-07-21 08:40 +0200
Message-ID<pOznz-mJ-7@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#1188695
On Mon, Jul 20, 2015 at 11:28 PM, Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> * Brian Gerst <brgerst@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Allocate a separate structure for the vm86 fields.
>
> Why is this allocated dynamically? This structure is not very large, and a hole in
> thread_struct isn't that big of an issue - compared to additional fragility
> introduced by the (mostly untested by normal apps) dynamic allocation here ...
>
> I don't mind the introduction of the sub-structure in itself, but please embedd it
> in thread_struct.
>

This ends up being several hundred bytes, I think, due to including an
entire struct pt_regs.  Do we really want to enlarge thread_struct
that much for something that's essentially never used?

--Andy
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#1188700

FromIngo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Date2015-07-21 08:40 +0200
Message-ID<pOznA-mJ-13@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#1188698
* Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net> wrote:

> On Mon, Jul 20, 2015 at 11:28 PM, Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> wrote:
> >
> > * Brian Gerst <brgerst@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Allocate a separate structure for the vm86 fields.
> >
> > Why is this allocated dynamically? This structure is not very large, and a 
> > hole in thread_struct isn't that big of an issue - compared to additional 
> > fragility introduced by the (mostly untested by normal apps) dynamic 
> > allocation here ...
> >
> > I don't mind the introduction of the sub-structure in itself, but please 
> > embedd it in thread_struct.
> 
> This ends up being several hundred bytes, I think, due to including an entire 
> struct pt_regs.  Do we really want to enlarge thread_struct that much for 
> something that's essentially never used?

Ok, I only judged by the first patch, I did not realize it becomes that much 
larger in later patches.

I've extended the changelog to explain this properly.

Thanks,

	Ingo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#1188699

FromIngo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Date2015-07-21 08:40 +0200
Message-ID<pOznz-mJ-9@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#1188695
* Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> wrote:

> * Brian Gerst <brgerst@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > Allocate a separate structure for the vm86 fields.
> 
> Why is this allocated dynamically? This structure is not very large, and a hole 
> in thread_struct isn't that big of an issue - compared to additional fragility 
> introduced by the (mostly untested by normal apps) dynamic allocation here ...
> 
> I don't mind the introduction of the sub-structure in itself, but please embedd 
> it in thread_struct.

Otherwise I have no objections to the rest of the series, nice fixes!

Thanks,

	Ingo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]


Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel


csiph-web