Re: [PATCH][RFC] 4K stacks default, not a debug thing any more...?

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


On 07/17/2007 12:37 AM, Ray Lee wrote:

On 7/16/07, Rene Herman <[email protected]> wrote:
Seeing as how single-page stacks are much easier on the VM so that creating those zillion threads should also be faster, at _some_
percentage we get to say "and now to hell with the rest".
This is the core dispute here. Stated differently, I hope you never
design a bridge that I have to drive over.

Correctness first, optimization second. Introducing random and
difficult to trace crashes upon an unsuspecting audience of sysadmins
and users is not a viable option.
Quite. But unfortunately you didn't actually go into the bit on how given
seperate interrupt stacks, available stackspace might not actually _be_ less
after selecting CONFIG_4KSTCKS nor into Fedora and RHEL shipping it already.
If at some point one of the pro-4k stacks crowd can prove that all
code paths are safe
I'll do that the minute you prove the current shared 8K stacks are safe. Do
we have a deal?
or introduce another viable alternative (such as Matt's idea for
extending the stack dynamically), then removing the 8k stacks option
makes sense.
I'm still waiting for larger soft-pages... does anyone in this thread have a
clue on their status?
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

[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]
  Powered by Linux