From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Date: Mon, 7 Feb 2005 11:30:00 -0800 From: "David S. Miller" Subject: Re: [patch 19/24] TASK_SIZE is variable. Message-Id: <20050207113000.79c60358.davem@davemloft.net> In-Reply-To: <24245.1107773953@redhat.com> References: <20050204215244.1d2532f7.davem@davemloft.net> <200502050150.j151osl11380@mail.osdl.org> <24245.1107773953@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: David Howells Cc: torvalds@osdl.org, akpm@osdl.org, dwmw2@infradead.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Mon, 07 Feb 2005 10:59:13 +0000 David Howells wrote: > David S. Miller wrote: > > > > For example, replacing TASK_SIZE in fs/namei.c with "thread->addr_limit" > > > would actually clean up the code: it would mean that the games with > > > "get_fs()" etc would just go away, to be replaced with something like > > > > I think that looks nice too. > > > > Would you be against a "mm->addr_limit"? That's what an approach > > by Paulus implemented, and I was in the camp supporting that kind > > of direction. > > On the other hand, this value is constant on some archs, and in those cases, > wouldn't it be better for it to be a compile-time constant? How can it be constant? It would need to change when a set_fs(KERNEL_DS) is performed.