From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Aug 2 02:38:29 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6BE6237B401 for ; Sat, 2 Aug 2003 02:38:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailman.zeta.org.au (mailman.zeta.org.au [203.26.10.16]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 16F3643F75 for ; Sat, 2 Aug 2003 02:38:28 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from bde@zeta.org.au) Received: from gamplex.bde.org (katana.zip.com.au [61.8.7.246]) by mailman.zeta.org.au (8.9.3p2/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA19955; Sat, 2 Aug 2003 19:38:17 +1000 Date: Sat, 2 Aug 2003 19:38:16 +1000 (EST) From: Bruce Evans X-X-Sender: bde@gamplex.bde.org To: Julian Elischer In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20030802192758.X2520@gamplex.bde.org> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: NVidia glx stuff dies in sysarch(I386_SET_LDT, ...) X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 02 Aug 2003 09:38:29 -0000 On Fri, 1 Aug 2003, Julian Elischer wrote: > looking at it further, it appears that NLDT is not really a > 'reservation' as much as a description of how much space we may > need to allocate initially. Correct, except it seems that there are some bugs from the kernel using the code and data selectors see another reply). > I think that it wouldn't matter (for example) if you used one of the > existing defined numbers as long as you are not running a program that > used them.. > i.e you could use as you are not a BSDI binary that needs it. Even changing the code and data selectors so that user code can't run should be just foot shooting. It seems to be allowed before rev.1.84. The LDT is a user resource and the kernel can do very little about applications and libraries mismanaging it. It can just help them manage it. Dynamic allocation seems to be a correct first step towards letting them manage it. > Also it's interesting to note that '0' is defined.. > this is intersting as a value of a segment register of '0' > is not allowed from my memory. > I guess that only applies to GDTEs. Correct. Bruce