On 07/17/2007 12:37 AM, Ray Lee wrote:

quoted text
> On 7/16/07, Rene Herman <rene.herman@gmail.com> wrote:

quoted text
>> Seeing as how single-page stacks are much easier on the VM so that 
>> creating those zillion threads should also be faster, at _some_
>> percentage we get to say "and now to hell with the rest".
> 
> This is the core dispute here. Stated differently, I hope you never
> design a bridge that I have to drive over.
> 
> Correctness first, optimization second. Introducing random and
> difficult to trace crashes upon an unsuspecting audience of sysadmins
> and users is not a viable option.

Quite. But unfortunately you didn't actually go into the bit on how given 
seperate interrupt stacks, available stackspace might not actually _be_ less 
after selecting CONFIG_4KSTCKS nor into Fedora and RHEL shipping it already.

quoted text
> If at some point one of the pro-4k stacks crowd can prove that all
> code paths are safe

I'll do that the minute you prove the current shared 8K stacks are safe. Do 
we have a deal?

quoted text
> or introduce another viable alternative (such as Matt's idea for
> extending the stack dynamically), then removing the 8k stacks option
> makes sense.

I'm still waiting for larger soft-pages... does anyone in this thread have a 
clue on their status?

Rene.
-
unsubscribe notice
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/