[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <761c5902-9f6e-404e-8265-3060946368c9@bell.net>
Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2024 08:22:45 -0400
From: John David Anglin <dave.anglin@...l.net>
To: John Paul Adrian Glaubitz <glaubitz@...sik.fu-berlin.de>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
LEROY Christophe <christophe.leroy2@...soprasteria.com>,
Helge Deller <deller@....de>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...nel.org>,
Linux-Arch <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Cc: Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org>, Andreas Larsson <andreas@...sler.com>,
guoren <guoren@...nel.org>, Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@...roup.eu>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
"sparclinux@...r.kernel.org" <sparclinux@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-s390@...r.kernel.org" <linux-s390@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-sh@...r.kernel.org" <linux-sh@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-csky@...r.kernel.org" <linux-csky@...r.kernel.org>,
"Naveen N. Rao" <naveen.n.rao@...ux.ibm.com>,
Heiko Carstens <hca@...ux.ibm.com>,
"musl@...ts.openwall.com" <musl@...ts.openwall.com>,
Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@...il.com>, Alexander Viro
<viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>, LTP List <ltp@...ts.linux.it>,
Brian Cain <bcain@...cinc.com>, Christian Brauner <brauner@...nel.org>,
Thomas Bogendoerfer <tsbogend@...ha.franken.de>,
Xi Ruoyao <libc-alpha@...rceware.org>,
"linux-parisc@...r.kernel.org" <linux-parisc@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-mips@...r.kernel.org" <linux-mips@...r.kernel.org>,
Adhemerval Zanella Netto <adhemerval.zanella@...aro.org>,
"linux-hexagon@...r.kernel.org" <linux-hexagon@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org" <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
"David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 07/15] parisc: use generic sys_fanotify_mark
implementation
On 2024-06-21 4:54 a.m., John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, 2024-06-21 at 08:28 +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>> It's more likely to be related to the upward growing stack.
>> I checked the gcc sources and found that out of the 50 supported
>> architectures, ARGS_GROW_DOWNWARD is set on everything except
>> for gcn, stormy16 and 32-bit parisc. The other two are
>> little-endian though. STACK_GROWS_DOWNWARD in turn is set on
>> everything other than parisc (both 32-bit and 64-bit).
> Wait a second! Does that mean that on 64-bit PA-RISC, the stack is
> actually growing downwards? If yes, that would be a strong argument
> for creating a 64-bit PA-RISC port in Debian and replacing the 32-bit
> port.
No, the stack grows upward on both 32 and 64-bit parisc. But stack arguments
grow upwards on 64-bit parisc. The argument pointer is needed to access these
arguments. In 32-bit parisc, the argument pointer is at a fixed offset relative to the
stack pointer and it can be eliminated.
Dave
--
John David Anglin dave.anglin@...l.net
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
