Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2007 16:14:24 -0800 From: Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org> To: Marcel Moolenaar <xcllnt@mac.com> Cc: Kostik Belousov <kostikbel@gmail.com>, Alexander Motin <mav@freebsd.org>, freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Kernel thread stack usage Message-ID: <47379AE0.2070808@elischer.org> In-Reply-To: <0414590D-0C2A-4EBD-9617-7AC193ABD1E8@mac.com> References: <1191187393.00807485.1191175801@10.7.7.3> <1191189248.00807488.1191177603@10.7.7.3> <4736D8AF.7010209@FreeBSD.org> <20071111163815.GJ37471@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua> <47373C5E.2080800@elischer.org> <0414590D-0C2A-4EBD-9617-7AC193ABD1E8@mac.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Marcel Moolenaar wrote: > On Nov 11, 2007, at 9:31 AM, Julian Elischer wrote: > >> Also, and others may want to pipe in on this, it might go in >> machine dependent code because it is *theoretically* we could port one >> day to a machine with an upward growing stack. > > This is not theoretical at all: On ia64 there are 2 stacks. One > growing down and one growing up. The downward stack is used for > stack-based variables and the pward growing stack is used by > the processor for stacked registers. > > The code suggested will not be meaningful on ia64. > I KNEW I'd heard something about an upward growing stack recently...
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?47379AE0.2070808>