From: "Richard B. Johnson" <root@chaos.analogic.com>
To: Davide Libenzi <davidel@xmailserver.org>
Cc: Linux kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: top stack (l)users for 2.5.69
Date: Wed, 7 May 2003 15:22:23 -0400 (EDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.53.0305071517100.13724@chaos> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.50.0305071137330.2208-100000@blue1.dev.mcafeelabs.com>
On Wed, 7 May 2003, Davide Libenzi wrote:
> On Wed, 7 May 2003, Richard B. Johnson wrote:
>
> > No, No. That is a process stack. Every process has it's own, entirely
> > seperate stack. This stack is used only in user mode. The kernel has
> > it's own stack. Every time you switch to kernel mode either by
> > calling the kernel or by a hardware interrupt, the kernel's stack
> > is used.
>
> Is it your understanding that does not exist a per task kernel stack ?
>
It is my understanding that there is one kernel stack. If there
is a stack allocated for some "transition", and I guess there
may be, because of the mail I'm getting, then it has absolutely
no purpose whatsoever and is wasted valuable non-paged RAM.
The reason why system-call parameters are passed in registers
is so that we didn't have the overhead of copying stuff from a
user stack to a kernel stack.
Does anybody know (not guess) if this was stuff added for the
new non-interrupt 0x80 syscall code? I want to know how a
simple kernel got corrupted into this twisted thing.
Anybody who has a copy of any of the Intel manuals since '386
knows that there needs to be only one kernel stack.
Cheers,
Dick Johnson
Penguin : Linux version 2.4.20 on an i686 machine (797.90 BogoMips).
Why is the government concerned about the lunatic fringe? Think about it.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-05-07 19:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 68+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-05-07 13:20 top stack (l)users for 2.5.69 Jörn Engel
2003-05-07 13:45 ` Richard B. Johnson
2003-05-07 13:56 ` Jörn Engel
2003-05-07 14:16 ` Richard B. Johnson
2003-05-07 17:13 ` Jonathan Lundell
2003-05-07 17:40 ` Richard B. Johnson
2003-05-07 18:12 ` Roland Dreier
2003-05-07 18:28 ` Richard B. Johnson
2003-05-07 18:44 ` Timothy Miller
2003-05-07 18:46 ` Roland Dreier
2003-05-07 19:30 ` Richard B. Johnson
2003-05-07 19:42 ` Roland Dreier
2003-05-07 20:04 ` Richard B. Johnson
2003-05-07 20:23 ` Roland Dreier
2003-05-07 20:42 ` Timothy Miller
2003-05-08 9:06 ` Jörn Engel
2003-05-08 11:33 ` Richard B. Johnson
2003-05-08 12:00 ` Helge Hafting
2003-05-08 15:42 ` Timothy Miller
2003-05-09 8:57 ` Miles Bader
2003-05-09 16:50 ` Timothy Miller
2003-05-08 16:47 ` Davide Libenzi
2003-05-07 18:51 ` Davide Libenzi
2003-05-07 19:22 ` Richard B. Johnson [this message]
2003-05-07 19:31 ` Davide Libenzi
2003-05-07 19:39 ` Hua Zhong
2003-05-07 21:47 ` Martin J. Bligh
2003-05-08 10:29 ` David Howells
2003-05-07 17:55 ` Jörn Engel
2003-05-07 16:20 ` Martin J. Bligh
2003-05-07 19:01 ` Dave Hansen
2003-05-07 20:06 ` Jörn Engel
2003-05-07 20:14 ` Dave Hansen
2003-05-08 8:41 ` Jörn Engel
2003-05-08 16:51 ` Dave Hansen
2003-05-08 22:12 ` Jörn Engel
2003-05-07 21:30 ` Jesse Pollard
2003-05-07 21:54 ` Timothy Miller
2003-05-07 22:01 ` Jesse Pollard
2003-05-07 14:33 ` Torsten Landschoff
2003-05-07 14:47 ` William Lee Irwin III
2003-05-07 15:04 ` Torsten Landschoff
2003-05-07 16:01 ` William Lee Irwin III
2003-05-08 15:36 ` Ingo Oeser
2003-05-08 18:04 ` William Lee Irwin III
2003-05-07 15:23 ` Timothy Miller
2003-05-07 15:47 ` William Lee Irwin III
2003-05-07 16:49 ` Jörn Engel
2003-05-07 17:18 ` Davide Libenzi
2003-05-07 17:40 ` Jörn Engel
2003-05-07 18:35 ` Davide Libenzi
2003-05-07 19:45 ` Jörn Engel
2003-05-07 18:23 ` William Lee Irwin III
2003-05-07 17:38 ` William Lee Irwin III
2003-05-07 17:47 ` Jörn Engel
2003-05-07 14:49 ` Richard B. Johnson
2003-05-07 18:36 ` Linus Torvalds
2003-05-07 19:17 ` Jeff Garzik
2003-05-07 20:38 ` Randy.Dunlap
2003-05-07 21:27 ` Marcus Alanen
2003-05-07 21:27 ` Randy.Dunlap
2003-05-08 15:10 ` Ingo Oeser
2003-05-08 17:12 ` Randy.Dunlap
2003-05-07 19:38 Chuck Ebbert
2003-05-08 14:08 Chuck Ebbert
2003-05-08 18:04 ` Jonathan Lundell
2003-05-08 19:05 ` Timothy Miller
2003-05-08 21:00 ` Jonathan Lundell
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=Pine.LNX.4.53.0305071517100.13724@chaos \
--to=root@chaos.analogic.com \
--cc=davidel@xmailserver.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).