On Thu, 15 Dec 2005, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 15, 2005 at 02:00:13PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
>
> > Supporting 8k stacks is a small amount of code and nobody has seen a need
> > to make changes in there for quite a long time. So there's little cost to
> > keeping the existing code.
> >
> > And the existing code is useful:
> >
> > a) people can enable it to confirm that their weird crash was due to a
> > stack overflow.
> >
> > b) If I was going to put together a maximally-stable kernel for a
> > complex server machine, I'd select 8k stacks. We're still just too
> > squeezy, and we've had too many relatively-recent overflows, and there
> > are still some really deep callpaths in there.
>
> a1) People turn off 4k stacks and never report the problem / noone
> really debugs and fixes the reported problem.
>
> Me threatening people with enabling 4k stacks for everyone already
> resulted in several fixes.
How about this, we apply this patch and perhaps add some debug option to
enable 8k by changing THREAD_SIZE. This way we have the seperate interrupt
stacks and 8k stacks for when someone suspects a stack overflow.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
