From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Linus Torvalds Date: Mon, 09 May 2011 22:58:02 +0000 Subject: Re: [PATCH] Don't mlock guardpage if the stack is growing up Message-Id: List-Id: References: <1304979549.4865.56.camel@mulgrave.site> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Tony Luck Cc: James Bottomley , Mikulas Patocka , Fenghua Yu , Hugh Dickins , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-parisc@vger.kernel.org, Michel Lespinasse , Oleg Nesterov , linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 3:53 PM, Tony Luck wrote: > > P.S. while we could start both stacks on the same page and have the grow > away from the start point, ia64 actually starts them out a fair distance apart > and lets them run into each other (if you have enough memory to let them > grow that far, and if ulimit -s doesn't stop them earlier) Ahh, so you never actually have one single mapping that has both flags set? In that case, I won't even worry about it. One thing I did want to verify: did the mlockall() actually change the stack size without that patch? Just to double-check that the patch actually did change semantics visibly. Linus