On Fri, 1 Aug 2003, Daniel Eischen wrote: > On Fri, 1 Aug 2003, Marcel Moolenaar wrote: > > > On Fri, Aug 01, 2003 at 06:51:33PM -0400, Daniel Eischen wrote: > > > > > > LUCODE_SEL is used by kernel to load _ucodesel to user %cs > > > > LUDATA_SEL is used by kernel to load _udatasel to user %ds, %es, %fs, %gs. > > > > I didn't check other ABIs, but setting to a fixed location of LDT in userland > > > > is also a bad idea, I think it will conflict with thread library soon, > > > > it is better to use dynamic allocating facility newly added in i386_set_ldt. > > > > > > Perhaps we need to rethink the interface and disallow > > > specification of any ldt; only allow dynamic. We would > > > need a different method of setting an array of them, though. > > > > Why not allow setting a specific entry when it's currently unused > > and not reserved by us? > > We can simply fail if the process is trying to set a LDT entry that's > > currently being used or is reserved by us. The only case that causes > > problems is when an existing LDT entry is overwritten by another > > consumer. > > That's what I was worried about. Once an application or > library is written to use specific LDTs, you never know > how it will be affected by the use of threading libraries > (or other libraries using threads). > > I can see the need to keep the old behavoir for compatibility's > sake. How about we complain loudly on the console when it's done.. (for the first few times) (with info on how to do it right) > > -- > Dan Eischen > > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-current_at_freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscribe_at_freebsd.org" >Received on Fri Aug 01 2003 - 14:20:27 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:37:17 UTC