From: Andi Kleen <ak@muc.de>
To: "Martin J. Bligh" <mbligh@aracnet.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: TASK_UNMAPPED_BASE & stack location
Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2003 23:54:56 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <m3sms644zz.fsf@averell.firstfloor.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20030425204012$4424@gated-at.bofh.it> ("Martin J. Bligh"'s message of "Fri, 25 Apr 2003 22:40:12 +0200")
"Martin J. Bligh" <mbligh@aracnet.com> writes:
> Is there any good reason we can't remove TASK_UNMAPPED_BASE, and just shove
> libraries directly above the program text? Red Hat seems to have patches to
> dynamically tune it on a per-processes basis anyway ...
Yes. You won't get a continuous sbrk/brk heap then anymore. Not sure it is a
big problem though.
But apparently Solaris/x86 is doing that.
It's probably worth a sysctl at least.
> Moreover, can we put the stack back where it's meant to be, below the
> program text, in that wasted 128MB of virtual space? Who really wants
>> 128MB of stack anyway (and can't fix their app)?
You could, but I bet it would break some programs
(e.g. just moving __PAGE_OFFSET on amd64 to 4GB for 32bit broke some things)
-Andi
next parent reply other threads:[~2003-04-25 21:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <20030425204012$4424@gated-at.bofh.it>
2003-04-25 21:54 ` Andi Kleen [this message]
2003-04-25 22:06 ` TASK_UNMAPPED_BASE & stack location William Lee Irwin III
2003-04-25 22:10 ` Martin J. Bligh
2003-04-25 23:02 Chuck Ebbert
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2003-04-25 23:02 Chuck Ebbert
[not found] <20030425220018$6219@gated-at.bofh.it>
[not found] ` <20030425220018$76b1@gated-at.bofh.it>
[not found] ` <20030425225007$3fae@gated-at.bofh.it>
2003-04-25 22:58 ` Andi Kleen
2003-04-25 23:13 ` Hui Huang
2003-04-25 20:32 Martin J. Bligh
2003-04-25 20:32 ` Martin J. Bligh
2003-04-25 21:01 ` H. Peter Anvin
2003-04-25 21:10 ` Martin J. Bligh
2003-04-25 21:12 ` H. Peter Anvin
2003-04-25 22:02 ` Timothy Miller
2003-04-25 22:06 ` Martin J. Bligh
2003-04-25 23:15 ` H. Peter Anvin
2003-04-25 23:19 ` Martin J. Bligh
2003-04-26 0:11 ` H. Peter Anvin
2003-04-26 0:42 ` Hugh Dickins
2003-04-26 5:15 ` Martin J. Bligh
2003-04-26 10:40 ` jlnance
2003-04-26 15:39 ` Martin J. Bligh
2003-04-25 23:52 ` badari
2003-04-25 23:52 ` badari
2003-04-25 23:58 ` William Lee Irwin III
2003-04-25 23:58 ` William Lee Irwin III
2003-04-26 14:37 ` Rik van Riel
2003-04-26 14:37 ` Rik van Riel
2003-04-26 15:03 ` William Lee Irwin III
2003-04-26 15:03 ` William Lee Irwin III
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=m3sms644zz.fsf@averell.firstfloor.org \
--to=ak@muc.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mbligh@aracnet.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.