On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 11:35 AM, David Miller <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Comparing get_fs() with USER_DS should be portable enough, as should
> STACK_TOP, right? Or does STACK_TOP have some weird semantics on some
> architectures that I'm not aware of?
STACK_TOP is definitely not portable. TASK_SIZE would be closer, and
was what the old deleted code in fs/namei.c used to use.
It may *happen* that all big-endian machines make STACK_TOP be the
same as TASK_SIZE, but that would be more of an accident than anything
else.
Linus
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arch" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
