All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@bootlin.com>
To: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
Cc: David Laight <david.laight.linux@gmail.com>,
	 Lukas Wunner <lukas@wunner.de>,
	 linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	 Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at>,
	Vignesh Raghavendra <vigneshr@ti.com>,
	 Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/1] mtd: cfi_cmdset_0001: Factor out do_write_buffer_locked() to reduce stack frame
Date: Mon, 27 Apr 2026 17:38:31 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <87ik9cfm6g.fsf@bootlin.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ad41TpzL4onrcKzn@ashevche-desk.local> (Andy Shevchenko's message of "Tue, 14 Apr 2026 15:38:38 +0300")

Hello,

On 14/04/2026 at 15:38:38 +03, Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com> wrote:

> On Thu, Apr 09, 2026 at 12:28:46PM +0100, David Laight wrote:
>> On Thu, 9 Apr 2026 09:58:28 +0200
>> Lukas Wunner <lukas@wunner.de> wrote:
>> > On Thu, Apr 09, 2026 at 08:26:11AM +0100, David Laight wrote:
>> > > On Wed,  8 Apr 2026 23:11:48 +0200 Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com> wrote:  
>> > > > Compiler is not happy about used stack frame:
>> > > > 
>> > > > drivers/mtd/chips/cfi_cmdset_0001.c: In function 'do_write_buffer':
>> > > > drivers/mtd/chips/cfi_cmdset_0001.c:1887:1: error: the frame size of 1296 bytes is larger than 1280 bytes [-Werror=frame-larger-than=]
>> > > > 
>> > > > Fix this by factoring out do_write_buffer_locked().  
>> > > 
>> > > Does this just split the large stack frame between two nested functions?
>> > > I'd also expect the compiler to inline do_write_buffer_locked() so it
>> > > makes little difference.
>> > > OTOH I can't immediately see where the large stack frame comes from.  
>> > 
>> > The error occurs for an allmodconfig build on arm, which implies
>> > CONFIG_KASAN_STACK=y and thus increases stack usage vis-à-vis a
>> > "regular" build.
>> > 
>> > Stack usage is high here because of the three "map_word" types,
>> > which can each be up to 256 unsigned longs (32 * 8), see the
>> > definitions of MAX_MAP_LONGS, MAX_MAP_BANKWIDTH, map_word in
>> > include/linux/mtd/map.h.
>> 
>> Ugg - that code is horrid.
>> Returning structures by value isn't really a good idea.

Looks like the primary reason for the stack over usage, no? Isn't
playing with inline and refactoring just a tiny fix that prevents
problem by just a couple of bytes?

I haven't looked too carefully, but could we (Andy?) have a fix that
reduces the number of map_word (as suggested, IIUC) and/or avoid passing
them by value? I can also take this cleanup if enclosed in a bigger
series, I don't mind because it may make the code easier to read as
well, but I feel like this is not a proper fix. If it is, please explain
to me again :-)

Thanks,
Miquèl

______________________________________________________
Linux MTD discussion mailing list
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-mtd/

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@bootlin.com>
To: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
Cc: David Laight <david.laight.linux@gmail.com>,
	 Lukas Wunner <lukas@wunner.de>,
	 linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	 Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at>,
	Vignesh Raghavendra <vigneshr@ti.com>,
	 Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/1] mtd: cfi_cmdset_0001: Factor out do_write_buffer_locked() to reduce stack frame
Date: Mon, 27 Apr 2026 17:38:31 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <87ik9cfm6g.fsf@bootlin.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ad41TpzL4onrcKzn@ashevche-desk.local> (Andy Shevchenko's message of "Tue, 14 Apr 2026 15:38:38 +0300")

Hello,

On 14/04/2026 at 15:38:38 +03, Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com> wrote:

> On Thu, Apr 09, 2026 at 12:28:46PM +0100, David Laight wrote:
>> On Thu, 9 Apr 2026 09:58:28 +0200
>> Lukas Wunner <lukas@wunner.de> wrote:
>> > On Thu, Apr 09, 2026 at 08:26:11AM +0100, David Laight wrote:
>> > > On Wed,  8 Apr 2026 23:11:48 +0200 Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com> wrote:  
>> > > > Compiler is not happy about used stack frame:
>> > > > 
>> > > > drivers/mtd/chips/cfi_cmdset_0001.c: In function 'do_write_buffer':
>> > > > drivers/mtd/chips/cfi_cmdset_0001.c:1887:1: error: the frame size of 1296 bytes is larger than 1280 bytes [-Werror=frame-larger-than=]
>> > > > 
>> > > > Fix this by factoring out do_write_buffer_locked().  
>> > > 
>> > > Does this just split the large stack frame between two nested functions?
>> > > I'd also expect the compiler to inline do_write_buffer_locked() so it
>> > > makes little difference.
>> > > OTOH I can't immediately see where the large stack frame comes from.  
>> > 
>> > The error occurs for an allmodconfig build on arm, which implies
>> > CONFIG_KASAN_STACK=y and thus increases stack usage vis-à-vis a
>> > "regular" build.
>> > 
>> > Stack usage is high here because of the three "map_word" types,
>> > which can each be up to 256 unsigned longs (32 * 8), see the
>> > definitions of MAX_MAP_LONGS, MAX_MAP_BANKWIDTH, map_word in
>> > include/linux/mtd/map.h.
>> 
>> Ugg - that code is horrid.
>> Returning structures by value isn't really a good idea.

Looks like the primary reason for the stack over usage, no? Isn't
playing with inline and refactoring just a tiny fix that prevents
problem by just a couple of bytes?

I haven't looked too carefully, but could we (Andy?) have a fix that
reduces the number of map_word (as suggested, IIUC) and/or avoid passing
them by value? I can also take this cleanup if enclosed in a bigger
series, I don't mind because it may make the code easier to read as
well, but I feel like this is not a proper fix. If it is, please explain
to me again :-)

Thanks,
Miquèl

  reply	other threads:[~2026-04-27 15:38 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-04-08 21:11 [PATCH v3 1/1] mtd: cfi_cmdset_0001: Factor out do_write_buffer_locked() to reduce stack frame Andy Shevchenko
2026-04-08 21:11 ` Andy Shevchenko
2026-04-09  7:26 ` David Laight
2026-04-09  7:26   ` David Laight
2026-04-09  7:58   ` Lukas Wunner
2026-04-09  7:58     ` Lukas Wunner
2026-04-09 11:28     ` David Laight
2026-04-09 11:28       ` David Laight
2026-04-14 12:38       ` Andy Shevchenko
2026-04-14 12:38         ` Andy Shevchenko
2026-04-27 15:38         ` Miquel Raynal [this message]
2026-04-27 15:38           ` Miquel Raynal
2026-04-27 15:47           ` Andy Shevchenko
2026-04-27 15:47             ` Andy Shevchenko
2026-04-28  8:20             ` Miquel Raynal
2026-04-28  8:20               ` Miquel Raynal

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=87ik9cfm6g.fsf@bootlin.com \
    --to=miquel.raynal@bootlin.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=david.laight.linux@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=lukas@wunner.de \
    --cc=richard@nod.at \
    --cc=vigneshr@ti.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.