On Sun, Dec 18, 2005 at 10:49:31AM -0500, Parag Warudkar wrote:
>
> 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
That's wrong.
My count of bug reports for problems with 4k stacks with in-kernel code
after Neil's patch went into -mm is still at 0.
> which are corner cases, that only occur under high load in obscure
> exceptional circumstances with large configurations and suitable
> nesting.
And this is not that much of an issue since most of these cases can and
have already been analyzed by static analysis to be below 3 kB stack
usage.
> 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.
>...
That's complete bullshit considering that we are talking about an
i386-only patch.
> Parag
cu
Adrian
--
"Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
"Only a promise," Lao Er said.
Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed
-
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]
