Re: 4k stacks in 2.6
From: Brian Gerst (bgerst_at_didntduck.org)
Date: 05/27/04
- Previous message: Jörn Engel: "Re: 4k stacks in 2.6"
- In reply to: Andrea Arcangeli: "Re: 4k stacks in 2.6"
- Next in thread: Andrea Arcangeli: "Re: 4k stacks in 2.6"
- Reply: Andrea Arcangeli: "Re: 4k stacks in 2.6"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Thu, 27 May 2004 10:18:40 -0400 To: Andrea Arcangeli <andrea@suse.de>
Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
> On Thu, May 27, 2004 at 02:45:51PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
>>are a bit belated. I only reacted to Andrea's mail to clear up apparent
>>misunderstandings about the impact and implementation of this feature.
>
>
> note that there is something relevant to improve in the implementation,
> that is the per-cpu irq stack size should be bigger than 4k, we use 16k
> on x86-64, on x86 it should be 8k. Currently you're decreasing _both_
> the normal kernel context and even the irq stack in some condition.
> There's no good reason to decrease the irq stack too, that's cheap, it's
> per-cpu.
The problem on i386 (unlike x86-64) is that the thread_info struct sits
at the bottom of the stack and is referenced by masking bits off %esp.
So the stack size must be constant whether in process context or IRQ
context.
-- Brian Gerst - 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/
- Previous message: Jörn Engel: "Re: 4k stacks in 2.6"
- In reply to: Andrea Arcangeli: "Re: 4k stacks in 2.6"
- Next in thread: Andrea Arcangeli: "Re: 4k stacks in 2.6"
- Reply: Andrea Arcangeli: "Re: 4k stacks in 2.6"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|