Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751065AbVLTUPN (ORCPT ); Tue, 20 Dec 2005 15:15:13 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751069AbVLTUPN (ORCPT ); Tue, 20 Dec 2005 15:15:13 -0500 Received: from [81.2.110.250] ([81.2.110.250]:50079 "EHLO lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751065AbVLTUPL (ORCPT ); Tue, 20 Dec 2005 15:15:11 -0500 Subject: Re: About 4k kernel stack size.... From: Alan Cox To: Mark Lord Cc: "J.A. Magallon" , "Linux-Kernel," , nel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <43A77205.2040306@rtr.ca> References: <20051218231401.6ded8de2@werewolf.auna.net> <43A77205.2040306@rtr.ca> Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2005 20:15:47 +0000 Message-Id: <1135109747.25010.0.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.2.3 (2.2.3-2.fc4) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 780 Lines: 16 On Llu, 2005-12-19 at 21:52 -0500, Mark Lord wrote: > The mainline code paths are undoubtedly fine with 4K stacks. > It's the *error paths* that are most likely to go deeper on the stack, > and those are rarely exercised by anyone. And those are the paths > that we *really* need to be reliable. Very few error paths are that deep, the obvious complex exception is the scsi one, but thats a seperate thread. Also the same argument about reliability is why going to 4K stack + IRQ stacks helps - it makes the stack usage predictable. - 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/