Date: Sat, 26 Jul 2003 01:24:13 -0700 From: Marcel Moolenaar <marcel@xcllnt.net> To: Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com> Cc: Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org> Subject: Re: fuword(), suword(), etc. Message-ID: <20030726082413.GB7470@dhcp01.pn.xcllnt.net> In-Reply-To: <3F2228ED.59F5739E@mindspring.com> References: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0307252346510.36615-100000@InterJet.elischer.org> <3F2228ED.59F5739E@mindspring.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, Jul 26, 2003 at 12:08:29AM -0700, Terry Lambert wrote: > > In answer to your question, my answer is still: > > "How do you intend to deal with 32 and 64 bit address spaces > on the same machine, if all you have is one function for the > copyin and one for the copyout?". > > Or is there no intent to allow IA32 binaries to run on IA64, > never ever ever? What does that have to do with anything? Adding fuptr()/suptr() has no consequences for supporting or not supporting different memory models with different pointer sizes. The functions are defined to operate on native (kernel PoV) pointers. Any non- native (kernel PoV) ABI has a non-native ABI handler that does all the mapping, converting and copying bits from userland to kernel and vice versa. And I can't believe I actually wasted my time telling you this when you only have to use your head instead of your keyboard. -- Marcel Moolenaar USPA: A-39004 marcel@xcllnt.net
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030726082413.GB7470>