Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932484AbVIHAox (ORCPT ); Wed, 7 Sep 2005 20:44:53 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932487AbVIHAox (ORCPT ); Wed, 7 Sep 2005 20:44:53 -0400 Received: from web50203.mail.yahoo.com ([206.190.38.44]:5271 "HELO web50203.mail.yahoo.com") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S932484AbVIHAow (ORCPT ); Wed, 7 Sep 2005 20:44:52 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=Message-ID:Received:Date:From:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=t4wO4JNnoHCZAvgkc4C7ESZOdPrpwnIJUHsnJ3KYKmkgSN7G7kFB7mcKp8QuOowPEV90KHVqLTzG5EMW0D0CtML0BT7i6gSMY29gOB/2C+Q3VP1El+CEcWWI5ol2+trig/8QNueFoGCCJLMQVxYOztXuP8qg7/cBrMbWbeCtfqM= ; Message-ID: <20050908004442.83467.qmail@web50203.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Wed, 7 Sep 2005 17:44:42 -0700 (PDT) From: Alex Davis Subject: Re: RFC: i386: kill !4KSTACKS To: Bill Davidsen , Linux Kernel Mailing List In-Reply-To: <431F18A3.6050502@tmr.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1632 Lines: 48 --- Bill Davidsen wrote: > Alex Davis wrote: > >>Please don't tell me to "care for closed-source drivers". > > > > ndiswrapper is NOT closed source. And I'm not asking you to "care". > > > > > >>I don't want the pain of debugging crashes on the machines which run unknown code > >>in kernel space. > > > > I'm not asking you to debug crashes. I'm simply requesting that the > > kernel stack size situation remain as it is: with 8K as the default > > and 4K configurable. > > I can be happy with 4K as the default, everything I use *except* > ndiswrapper seems to run fine (I don't currently need fancy filesystems) > but laptops seem to include a lot of unsupported hardware, which can't > be replaced due to resources (money, slots, batter life). > -- I could live with any default, as long as it's configurable. The intent here, however, is to take away the option. That's what I have an issue with. Is there any problem caused by letting stack size be configurable to any (sane) arbitrary maximum value (e.g. 32K)? > -bill davidsen (davidsen@tmr.com) > "The secret to procrastination is to put things off until the > last possible moment - but no longer" -me > I code, therefore I am __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com - 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/