Date: Fri, 20 Sep 1996 10:16:03 +0900 (JST) From: Michael Hancock <michaelh@cet.co.jp> To: Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org> Cc: dg@Root.COM, bde@zeta.org.au, proff@suburbia.net, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: thread stacks and protections (was Re: attribute/inode caching) Message-ID: <Pine.SV4.3.93.960920100556.20647D-100000@parkplace.cet.co.jp> In-Reply-To: <199609191856.LAA01219@phaeton.artisoft.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, 19 Sep 1996, Terry Lambert wrote: > The threading stack issue is one of either splitting or domainizing > the stack address space. Splitting requires using different mappings > from one thread to another. Domainizing is inherently unsatisfactory > because it leads to things like "no one will ever need mre than 4K of > stack" (a statement Windows95 and Windows NT implicitly make for VXD's). It is unsatisfactory to see hardlimits forced by the architecture. I understand there are tradeoffs, though I'm not sure what you mean by splitting. > I think John Dyson's response is best: it can be implemented (I wouldn't > say it was as trivial to do as John implies, but then John is a VM > guy and I am an FS guy), but we need to make sure that it's the right > thing being implemented. Yes. Regards, Mike Hancock
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.SV4.3.93.960920100556.20647D-100000>