Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S267235AbUIJK3l (ORCPT ); Fri, 10 Sep 2004 06:29:41 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S267234AbUIJK3l (ORCPT ); Fri, 10 Sep 2004 06:29:41 -0400 Received: from the-village.bc.nu ([81.2.110.252]:62638 "EHLO localhost.localdomain") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S267235AbUIJK3S (ORCPT ); Fri, 10 Sep 2004 06:29:18 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] Separate IRQ-stacks from 4K-stacks option From: Alan Cox To: Chris Wedgwood Cc: LKML , Christoph Hellwig In-Reply-To: <20040909232532.GA13572@taniwha.stupidest.org> References: <20040909232532.GA13572@taniwha.stupidest.org> Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <1094808406.17029.12.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.4.6 (1.4.6-2) Date: Fri, 10 Sep 2004 10:27:00 +0100 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 948 Lines: 20 On Gwe, 2004-09-10 at 00:25, Chris Wedgwood wrote: > Right now CONFIG_4KSTACKS implies IRQ-stacks. Some people though > really need 8K stacks and it would be nice to have IRQ-stacks for them > too. This is a lot of added code and complexity that does nothing. In 8K stack mode without IRQ stacks you already can only safely use 4K. So any code that is broken in 4K stack mode is broken in the current 8K stack mode although it'll fail less often since the failure will depend upon random IRQ/other timings. 8K + IRQ stacks is just making the stacks bigger (which is expensive) and stressing the vm more. Fix the broken code instead, or just stop supporting gcc 2.9x which will fix most of it for you - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/