From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Fri, 29 Mar 2002 17:50:22 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Fri, 29 Mar 2002 17:50:01 -0500 Received: from e21.nc.us.ibm.com ([32.97.136.227]:1275 "EHLO e21.nc.us.ibm.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Fri, 29 Mar 2002 17:49:56 -0500 Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2002 14:49:07 -0800 From: "Martin J. Bligh" To: Andrea Arcangeli cc: linux-kernel , gerrit@us.ibm.com Subject: Re: Backport of Ingo/Arjan highpte to 2.4.18 (+O1 scheduler) Message-ID: <13110000.1017442147@flay> In-Reply-To: <20020326180841.C13052@dualathlon.random> X-Mailer: Mulberry/2.1.2 (Linux/x86) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > I'm not considering to drop pte-highmem from 2.4 and to only support the > user-fixmaps in 2.5 because it is a showstopper bugfix for lots of > important users that definitely cannot wait 2.6. I'm also not > considering backporting the user-fixmaps because that would be a quite > invasive change messing also with the alignment of the user stack (I > know it could stay into kernel space, but right after the user stack it > will be more optimized and cleaner/simpler, so I prefer to put the few > virtual pages there). Can you explain the problem with the aligment of the user stack? I can't see what the problem is here .... and we need to start thinking about how to fix it if you've seen a problem that we haven't .... Thanks, M.