From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: kirill@shutemov.name (Kirill A. Shutemov) Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2017 17:19:59 +0300 Subject: [RFC, PATCHv2 29/29] mm, x86: introduce RLIMIT_VADDR In-Reply-To: References: <20161227015413.187403-1-kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com> <20161227015413.187403-30-kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com> <2736959.3MfCab47fD@wuerfel> <20170103160457.GB17319@node.shutemov.name> Message-ID: <20170104141959.GC17319@node.shutemov.name> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Tue, Jan 03, 2017 at 10:27:22AM -0800, Andy Lutomirski wrote: > On Tue, Jan 3, 2017 at 8:04 AM, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote: > > And what about stack? I'm not sure that everybody would be happy with > > stack in the middle of address space. > > I would, personally. I think that, for very large address spaces, we > should allocate a large block of stack and get rid of the "stack grows > down forever" legacy idea. Then we would never need to worry about > the stack eventually hitting some other allocation. And 2^57 bytes is > hilariously large for a default stack. The stack in the middle of address space can prevent creating other huuuge contiguous mapping. Databases may want this. -- Kirill A. Shutemov