Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> wrote:
quoted text
> On Thu, 19 Jul 2007 03:33:58 +0200
> Andrea Arcangeli <andrea@suse.de> wrote:

quoted text
>> > 8K stacks without IRQ stacks are not "safer" so I don't understand your
>> > comment ?
>> 
>> Ouch, see the reports about 4k stack crashes. I agree they're not
>> safe w/o irq stacks (like on x86-64), but they're generally safer.
> 
> Still don't follow. How is "exceeds stack space but less likely to be
> noticed" safer.

If there is a tree in the forest, is it as likely to fall as the three
that's being chopped in front of our eyes? It is, because each tree will
fall eventually, but you'd still not allow your kids to play on the
tree being chopped, but you'd probably allow them to climb that other tree
like all the other kids do.

The same applies to the stack: We don't know if or when we'll see all
possible interrupts fire and kill the 8K stack, but we know for sure the
8K stack has been climbed for years and there is an axe on that 4K stack.
So where do you send the users to play?
-- 
What's worse than a Male Chauvinist Pig?
A woman that won't do what she's told.

Friß, Spammer: Fq@Bbu29.7eggert.dyndns.org od1Gkubx@hrBky.7eggert.dyndns.org
-
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/