On Dec 18, 2005, at 7:09 AM, Adrian Bunk wrote:
There is no workload where 8kB suits better.
People have pointed out that there is currently at least one
incompatibility introduced by 4K stacks and there may be many others
which are corner cases, that only occur under high load in obscure
exceptional circumstances with large configurations and suitable
nesting.
Moreover for 64 bit architectures there is no proven point that 4Kb
stacks are solving a specific problem there (Like the lowmem
fragmentation on i386 for e.g.). Nor can we predict for sure that in
future no type of functionality will require more stack. So taking
away 8Kb stack size on such arches solves no known problems and
introduces artificial limitations on code complexity.
All I am asking is what is wrong with having options? You can even
default to 4Kb and let people choose 8Kb when they absolutely benefit
from it. Does having options introduce code bloat or what is it that
is pressing so hard to remove the 8Kb "option"?
Parag
-
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]
