From: Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de>
To: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [2.6 patch] i386: always use 4k stacks
Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2005 17:10:04 +0100
User-Agent: KMail/1.8.2
Cc: Oliver Neukum <oliver@neukum.org>, jmerkey <jmerkey@utah-nac.org>,
       =?utf-8?q?J=C3=B6rn_Engel?= <joern@wohnheim.fh-wedel.de>,
       alex14641@yahoo.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
References: <20051116005034.73421.qmail@web50210.mail.yahoo.com> <200511161630.59588.oliver@neukum.org> <1132155482.2834.42.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org>
In-Reply-To: <1132155482.2834.42.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-Id: <200511161710.05526.ak@suse.de>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 953
Lines: 23

On Wednesday 16 November 2005 16:38, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> On Wed, 2005-11-16 at 16:30 +0100, Oliver Neukum wrote:
> > Am Mittwoch, 16. November 2005 15:42 schrieb jmerkey:
> > > Map a blank ro page beneath the address range when stack memory is 
> > > mapped is trap on page faults to the page when folks go off the end of 
> > > th e stack.
> > > 
> > > Easy to find.
> > 
> > Provided you can easily trigger it. I don't see how that is a given.
> 
> the same is true for a unified 8k stack or for the 4k/4k split though.
> Ok sure there's a 1.5Kb difference on the one side.. (but a 2Kb gain on
> the other side)

I was always in favour of 8K process stacks + irq stacks. Works great on x86-64.

-Andi
-
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/