Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2011 23:48:57 +0200 From: Kostik Belousov <kostikbel@gmail.com> To: John Wehle <john@feith.com> Cc: amd64@freebsd.org Subject: Re: amd64/155903: FreeBSD32 emulation patch to support i386 X11 Server Message-ID: <20110324214857.GE78089@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua> In-Reply-To: <201103242126.p2OLQ8HM023021@jwlab.FEITH.COM> References: <201103242126.p2OLQ8HM023021@jwlab.FEITH.COM>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--N17FoJWtlLf7DYpQ Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 05:26:08PM -0400, John Wehle wrote: > > First, please split the patch into smaller, logically self-contained > > parts. E.g. the change to handle fdrop() in one place should be committ= ed > > separately. >=20 > Will do. Okay to just submit the series of patches under amd64/155903 > or do you want them file under separate bug reports? Simply mail the patches to me, with some words attached. I will land them into the tree. >=20 > > The last commit is the most controversial, in fact. I understand the > > reason to get the user memory for calling into pciconf ioctls, but this > > is somewhat ugly. Ideally, the pci_ioctl() would be changed into wrapper > > and core code, and two wrappers produced, one for the native call path, > > other for compat32. >=20 > I don't necessarily disagree, however that's more work than I'm planning = on > at the moment. Sigh. >=20 > > BTW, would you do the shims for other pciconf ioctls, while there ? >=20 > I would have if necesary (since I was there). However at a quick glance > of pciio.h it didn't appear to me to be necessary. Also I do suspect > that the i386 X11 Server is making successfuly use of some of the other > calls. >=20 > Keep in mind that the freebsd32 layer has generic handling for those > ioctl calls that don't require anything special. I believe PCIOCREAD, > PCIOCWRITE, and friends fall into that category since it appears the > structures don't change size or alignment between i386 and amd64 > (mind you this was based just on a quick glance at the header). This is good answer, I wanted to make sure that ioctls that need special handling are handled. Thanks. --N17FoJWtlLf7DYpQ Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (FreeBSD) iEYEARECAAYFAk2LvEkACgkQC3+MBN1Mb4jHtwCgkIGQqGCBJcndvftn4UTPPyuD NcYAni3Jtwa9QQTgbtqjHtaVjVGHOyVK =vBcb -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --N17FoJWtlLf7DYpQ--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20110324214857.GE78089>