From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S262324AbVGWDXv (ORCPT ); Fri, 22 Jul 2005 23:23:51 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S262327AbVGWDXv (ORCPT ); Fri, 22 Jul 2005 23:23:51 -0400 Received: from [216.208.38.107] ([216.208.38.107]:20626 "EHLO OTTLS.pngxnet.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S262324AbVGWDXu (ORCPT ); Fri, 22 Jul 2005 23:23:50 -0400 Subject: Re: [QN/PATCH] Why do some archs allocate stack via kmalloc, others via get_free_pages? From: Nigel Cunningham Reply-To: ncunningham@cyclades.com To: "David S. Miller" Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List In-Reply-To: <20050722.005025.26277081.davem@davemloft.net> References: <1122005477.3033.56.camel@localhost> <20050722.005025.26277081.davem@davemloft.net> Content-Type: text/plain Organization: Cycades Message-Id: <1122044224.3704.0.camel@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.4.6-1mdk Date: Sat, 23 Jul 2005 00:57:04 +1000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi. On Fri, 2005-07-22 at 17:50, David S. Miller wrote: > From: Nigel Cunningham > Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2005 14:11:17 +1000 > > > In making some modifications to Suspend, we've discovered that some > > arches use kmalloc and others use get_free_pages to allocate the stack. > > Is there a reason for the variation? If not, could the following patch > > be considered for inclusion (tested on x86 only). > > Some platforms really need it to be page aligned (sparc32 sun4c needs > to virtually map the resulting pages into a specific place, for > example). > > But, for the ones that don't have this requirement, they want the > cache coloring. Thanks David. Nigel -- Evolution. Enumerate the requirements. Consider the interdependencies. Calculate the probabilities.