From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Nov 12 00:14:55 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 897F916A417 for ; Mon, 12 Nov 2007 00:14:55 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from julian@elischer.org) Received: from outF.internet-mail-service.net (outF.internet-mail-service.net [216.240.47.229]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 62D8A13C4A8 for ; Mon, 12 Nov 2007 00:14:55 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from julian@elischer.org) Received: from mx0.idiom.com (HELO idiom.com) (216.240.32.160) by out.internet-mail-service.net (qpsmtpd/0.40) with ESMTP; Sun, 11 Nov 2007 16:14:23 -0800 X-Client-Authorized: MaGic Cook1e X-Client-Authorized: MaGic Cook1e X-Client-Authorized: MaGic Cook1e X-Client-Authorized: MaGic Cook1e Received: from julian-mac.elischer.org (home.elischer.org [216.240.48.38]) by idiom.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 83F0E1269B6; Sun, 11 Nov 2007 16:14:22 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <47379AE0.2070808@elischer.org> Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2007 16:14:24 -0800 From: Julian Elischer User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (Macintosh/20070728) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Marcel Moolenaar 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> In-Reply-To: <0414590D-0C2A-4EBD-9617-7AC193ABD1E8@mac.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Kostik Belousov , Alexander Motin , freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Kernel thread stack usage X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2007 00:14:55 -0000 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...