From: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
To: Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
linux-mm@kvack.org,
"Ryan C. England" <ryan.england@corvidtec.com>,
xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: XFS causing stack overflow
Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2011 10:05:11 +1100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20111211230511.GH14273@dastard> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20111211000036.GH24062@one.firstfloor.org>
On Sun, Dec 11, 2011 at 01:00:36AM +0100, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > Where does the x86-64 do the interrupt stack switch?
>
> in entry_64.S
>
> >
> > I know the x86 32 bit interrupt handler switches to an irq/softirq
> > context stack, but the 64 bit one doesn't appear to. Indeed,
> > arch/x86/kernel/irq_{32,64}.c are very different, and only the 32
> > bit irq handler switches to another stack to process the
> > interrupts...
>
> x86-64 always used interrupt stacks and has used softirq stacks
> for a long time. 32bit got to it much later (the only good
> thing left from that 4k stack "experiment")
Oh, it's hidden in the "SAVE_ARGS_IRQ" macro.
But that happens before do_IRQ is called, so what is the do_IRQ call
chain doing on this stack given that we've already supposed to have
switched to the interrupt stack before do_IRQ is called?
Cheers,
Dave.
--
Dave Chinner
david@fromorbit.com
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
To: Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, xfs@oss.sgi.com,
"Ryan C. England" <ryan.england@corvidtec.com>
Subject: Re: XFS causing stack overflow
Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2011 10:05:11 +1100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20111211230511.GH14273@dastard> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20111211000036.GH24062@one.firstfloor.org>
On Sun, Dec 11, 2011 at 01:00:36AM +0100, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > Where does the x86-64 do the interrupt stack switch?
>
> in entry_64.S
>
> >
> > I know the x86 32 bit interrupt handler switches to an irq/softirq
> > context stack, but the 64 bit one doesn't appear to. Indeed,
> > arch/x86/kernel/irq_{32,64}.c are very different, and only the 32
> > bit irq handler switches to another stack to process the
> > interrupts...
>
> x86-64 always used interrupt stacks and has used softirq stacks
> for a long time. 32bit got to it much later (the only good
> thing left from that 4k stack "experiment")
Oh, it's hidden in the "SAVE_ARGS_IRQ" macro.
But that happens before do_IRQ is called, so what is the do_IRQ call
chain doing on this stack given that we've already supposed to have
switched to the interrupt stack before do_IRQ is called?
Cheers,
Dave.
--
Dave Chinner
david@fromorbit.com
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-12-11 23:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-12-08 18:03 XFS causing stack overflow Ryan C. England
2011-12-09 11:55 ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-12-09 11:55 ` Christoph Hellwig
2011-12-09 15:56 ` Ryan C. England
2011-12-09 15:56 ` Ryan C. England
2011-12-09 22:19 ` Dave Chinner
2011-12-09 22:19 ` Dave Chinner
[not found] ` <20111209221956.GE14273__25752.826271537$1323469420$gmane$org@dastard>
2011-12-10 19:52 ` Andi Kleen
2011-12-10 19:52 ` Andi Kleen
2011-12-10 22:13 ` Dave Chinner
2011-12-10 22:13 ` Dave Chinner
2011-12-11 0:00 ` Andi Kleen
2011-12-11 0:00 ` Andi Kleen
2011-12-11 23:05 ` Dave Chinner [this message]
2011-12-11 23:05 ` Dave Chinner
2011-12-12 2:31 ` Andi Kleen
2011-12-12 2:31 ` Andi Kleen
2011-12-12 4:36 ` Dave Chinner
2011-12-12 4:36 ` Dave Chinner
2011-12-12 5:13 ` Andi Kleen
2011-12-12 5:13 ` Andi Kleen
2011-12-12 9:00 ` Dave Chinner
2011-12-12 9:00 ` Dave Chinner
2011-12-12 13:43 ` Ryan C. England
2011-12-12 13:43 ` Ryan C. England
2011-12-12 22:47 ` Dave Chinner
2011-12-12 22:47 ` Dave Chinner
[not found] ` <20111209115513.GA19994__23079.9863501035$1323435203$gmane$org@infradead.org>
2011-12-09 19:53 ` Andi Kleen
2011-12-09 19:53 ` Andi Kleen
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20111211230511.GH14273@dastard \
--to=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=andi@firstfloor.org \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=ryan.england@corvidtec.com \
--cc=xfs@oss.sgi.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.