[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: why "__put_user_8" but no "__get_user_8" on i386?

To: "Robert P. J. Day" <rpjday@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: why "__put_user_8" but no "__get_user_8" on i386?
From: "Mulyadi Santosa" <mulyadi.santosa@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 7 Jan 2007 21:28:20 +0700
Cc: "Kernel Newbies" <kernelnewbies@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=GBiNJ3BEAI1LEnNJVEgOicafrBvdtmyLYQsjBqXviXdsEGtHpqGkkFfVI2DzaBP1BOqP6Q/2nSHPwaBvYKXISfBu1yZZJrYAr4nHv0jI+U2dnYVwzZVIy1mnPxWs244uZAlhSlL9RJqOrq1u9bEfNstf86OVBmdY/vY0X4Syehg=
In-reply-to: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0701070506410.8111@localhost.localdomain>
List-archive: <http://mail.nl.linux.org/kernelnewbies/>
List-help: <mailto:ecartis@nl.linux.org?Subject=help>
List-id: <kernelnewbies.nl.linux.org>
List-owner: <mailto:ecartis-owner@nl.linux.org>
List-post: <mailto:kernelnewbies@nl.linux.org>
List-software: Ecartis version 1.0.0
List-subscribe: <mailto:kernelnewbies-request@nl.linux.org?Subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <mailto:kernelnewbies-request@nl.linux.org?Subject=unsubscribe>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0701070506410.8111@localhost.localdomain>
Sender: kernelnewbies-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxx

Hi...

  is there some reason that include/asm-i386/uaccess.h defines
__get_user_x up to 4, but __put_user_x up to 8?  why no __get_user_8?
just curious.


Sure about that? Maybe the get_user 64 bit can do 8 byte transfer? I
have no source in hand right now, so I just give ideas...

Another possibilty is, there isn't one, since the kernel assume it
can't do 8 bytes transfer atomically at once. But the kernel can
assume it can safely do so since it *knows* the proper locking has
been done.

Somebody CMIIW

regards,

Mulyadi

--
Kernelnewbies: Help each other learn about the Linux kernel.
Archive:       http://mail.nl.linux.org/kernelnewbies/
FAQ:           http://kernelnewbies.org/faq/

Follow-Ups:
- Re: why "__put_user_8" but no "__get_user_8" on i386?
  - From: Robert P. J. Day

References:
- why "__put_user_8" but no "__get_user_8" on i386?
  - From: Robert P. J. Day

Prev by Date: Re: recommendations for kernel debugging?
Next by Date: Re: Custom kernel and distribution
Previous by thread: why "__put_user_8" but no "__get_user_8" on i386?
Next by thread: Re: why "__put_user_8" but no "__get_user_8" on i386?
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread