Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S965196AbVLRP5f (ORCPT ); Sun, 18 Dec 2005 10:57:35 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S965204AbVLRP5f (ORCPT ); Sun, 18 Dec 2005 10:57:35 -0500 Received: from emailhub.stusta.mhn.de ([141.84.69.5]:46354 "HELO mailout.stusta.mhn.de") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S965196AbVLRP5f (ORCPT ); Sun, 18 Dec 2005 10:57:35 -0500 Date: Sun, 18 Dec 2005 16:57:37 +0100 From: Adrian Bunk To: Parag Warudkar Cc: Andi Kleen , Kyle Moffett , akpm@osdl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, arjan@infradead.org Subject: Re: [2.6 patch] i386: always use 4k stacks Message-ID: <20051218155737.GG23349@stusta.de> References: <20051215140013.7d4ffd5b.akpm@osdl.org> <20051216141002.2b54e87d.diegocg@gmail.com> <20051216140425.GY23349@stusta.de> <20051216163503.289d491e.diegocg@gmail.com> <632A9CF3-7F07-44D6-BFB4-8EAA272AF3E5@mac.com> <20051217205238.GR23349@stusta.de> <61D4A300-4967-4DC1-AD2C-765A3D2D9743@comcast.net> <20051218120900.GA23349@stusta.de> <2C3FD086-5582-4697-AB9F-578C80BA5811@comcast.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <2C3FD086-5582-4697-AB9F-578C80BA5811@comcast.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1755 Lines: 50 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 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/