From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751055AbWFGGXe (ORCPT ); Wed, 7 Jun 2006 02:23:34 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751056AbWFGGXd (ORCPT ); Wed, 7 Jun 2006 02:23:33 -0400 Received: from ns.virtualhost.dk ([195.184.98.160]:46690 "EHLO virtualhost.dk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751053AbWFGGXd (ORCPT ); Wed, 7 Jun 2006 02:23:33 -0400 Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2006 08:22:08 +0200 From: Jens Axboe To: Andrew Morton Cc: Ingo Molnar , laurent.riffard@free.fr, barryn@pobox.com, 76306.1226@compuserve.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, jbeulich@novell.com, arjan@linux.intel.com Subject: Re: 2.6.17-rc5-mm1 Message-ID: <20060607062208.GZ6693@suse.de> References: <44840838.7030802@free.fr> <4484584D.4070108@free.fr> <20060605110046.2a7db23f.akpm@osdl.org> <986ed62e0606051452x320cce2ap9598558b5343ae6b@mail.gmail.com> <20060606072628.GA28752@elte.hu> <4485E0D3.8080708@free.fr> <20060606205801.GC17787@elte.hu> <4485F5E2.5040708@free.fr> <20060606220507.GA19882@elte.hu> <20060606152930.adc58fe4.akpm@osdl.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20060606152930.adc58fe4.akpm@osdl.org> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Jun 06 2006, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Wed, 7 Jun 2006 00:05:07 +0200 > Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > > > * Laurent Riffard wrote: > > > > > >> Results: > > > >> - 2.6.17-rc4-mm3 with 4K stack works fine (this is the latest good 4K-kernel). > > > >> - 2.6.17-rc5-mm3 with 4K stack crashes, the stack seems to be corrupted. > > > > > > > > that's vanilla mm3, or mm3 patched with extra lockdep patches? If it's > > > > patched then you should try vanilla mm3 too. > > > > > > It was vanilla mm3. > > > > ok, i'll check the stack impact of the block_dev.c changes tomorrow. > > > > Note that Laurent is also passing through ide_cdrom_packet(), which has a > `struct request' on the stack. The kernel does this in a lot of places, > and at 168 bytes on x86, it'd really be best if we were to dynamically > allocate these things. That's an old peeve of mine, on-stack requests... It's nasty from several angles, stack usage just being one of them. Perhaps I'll give it a go for 2.6.18 and add checks for request being thrown at the block layer which didn't originate from get_request(). -- Jens Axboe