Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2014 12:36:03 +0530 From: "Jayachandran C." <c.jayachandran@gmail.com> To: Juli Mallett <jmallett@freebsd.org> Cc: "freebsd-mips@freebsd.org" <freebsd-mips@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: More trapframe panics Message-ID: <CA%2B7sy7ATMTjdWD5%2BNYCJPb=AWmeJoUwbgRdf=%2Bb4uYsJO0UUfw@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <CACVs6=--Qy_8poWdHdCXYKqkO22=dvHhW8=Uma8kLR%2BhCoZDxw@mail.gmail.com> References: <52E42A1B.3040907@rewt.org.uk> <CACVs6=--Qy_8poWdHdCXYKqkO22=dvHhW8=Uma8kLR%2BhCoZDxw@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi Juli, On Sun, Jan 26, 2014 at 3:36 AM, Juli Mallett <jmallett@freebsd.org> wrote: > > This happens easily on 64-bit MIPS because due to slightly-crummy design > on our part there's proportionally less room on the stack than on a 32-bit > system. Several people have nebulous plans to address the problem of the > stack being too small, but I don't know of anyone intending concrete action > going forward. I had not seen the issue so far. When I had done the pmap changes ealier, I had thought of adding the option to use a higher order page for kernel stack and using the KSEG0 address as the stack pointer, instead of using the wired entry as we do now. Is there any reason this will not work. JC.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CA%2B7sy7ATMTjdWD5%2BNYCJPb=AWmeJoUwbgRdf=%2Bb4uYsJO0UUfw>