![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
Rusty Russell wrote:
> That can't happen, since 0xc100000 is not in the kernel address space.
> 0xc1000000 is though, perhaps that's what you meant?
>
Yes, it is. Though it doesn't actually make any material difference to
my argument.
>> So, in this case the %gs base will be loaded with 0xc100000-0xc0431100 =
>> 0x4bccef00>> >> > A negative offset, exactly, which can't happen, as I said.
0x4bccef00 is positive. The correct number is 0xc1000000-0xc0431100 =
0xbcef00
The %gs:per_cpu__foo addressing mode still calculates
0xbcef00+0xc0433800, which is still a subtraction. My essential point
is that *all* kernel addresses (=kernel symbols) are negative, so using
them as an offset from a segment base (any segment base) is a
subtraction, which requires a 4G limit.
J
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| ||||||||||||
| Last update: 2006-09-25 07:29 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||||