Re: [RESEND][PATCH] Mark thread stack correctly in proc/<pid>/maps

[Siddhesh Poyarekar]

On Sat, Feb 4, 2012 at 12:04 AM, Siddhesh Poyarekar
<siddhesh.poyarekar@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 1:31 PM, KOSAKI Motohiro
> <kosaki.motohiro@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> The fact is, now process stack and pthread stack clearly behave
>> different dance. libc don't expect pthread stack grow automatically.
>> So, your patch will break userland. Just only change display thing.
<snip>
> I have also dropped an email on the libc-alpha list here to solicit
> comments from libc maintainers on this:
>
> http://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/2012-02/msg00036.html
>

Kosaki-san, your suggestion of adding an extra flag seems like the
right way to go about this based on the discussion on libc-alpha,
specifically, your point about pthread_getattr_np() -- it may not be a
standard, but it's a breakage anyway. However, looking at the vm_flags
options in mm.h, it looks like the entire 32-bit space has been
exhausted for the flag value. The vm_flags is an unsigned long, so it
ought to take 8 bytes on a 64-bit system, but 32-bit systems will be
left behind.

So there are two options for this:

1) make vm_flags 64-bit for all arches. This will cause ABI breakage
on 32-bit systems, so any external drivers will have to be rebuilt
2) Implement this patch for 64-bit only by defining the new flag only
for 64-bit. 32-bit systems behave as is

Which of these would be better? I prefer the latter because it looks
like the path of least breakage.

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