Re: [Lse-tech] Re: 2.5.69-mjb1

[Martin J. B. <mb...@ar...>]

>> Wow, that's intuitive :)
>> They're trying to access the variables that have been pushed onto the
>> top of the stack.  The thread_info field points to the bottom of the
>> kernel's stack (no matter how big it is).  I don't know where the -5 and
>> -2 come from.  It needs a big, fat stinking comment.
> 
> I'm not 100% convinced it DTRT on modern kernels. I vaguely wonder if
> the following would be more appropriate. Shame the typedef isn't there
> yet; the _struct suffix is an eyesore.


So are the new bits of the patch related to the KSTK_E* bit?
They don't seem to be ... however, this bit looks really good:

> -#define KSTK_EIP(tsk)	(((unsigned long *)(4096+(unsigned long)(tsk)->thread_info))[1019])
> -#define KSTK_ESP(tsk)	(((unsigned long *)(4096+(unsigned long)(tsk)->thread_info))[1022])
> +#define KSTK_EIP(task)	((task)->thread.eip)
> +#define KSTK_ESP(task)	((task)->thread.esp)

Can I assume it's tested, or does it need someone to do that?

Thanks,

M.