From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Jeff Dike <jdike@addtoit.com>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
uml-devel <user-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] UML - Fix kernel stack size on x86_64
Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2007 11:03:14 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20070606110314.c64f8234.akpm@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20070606151134.GA5972@c2.user-mode-linux.org>
On Wed, 6 Jun 2007 11:11:34 -0400 Jeff Dike <jdike@addtoit.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 05, 2007 at 06:20:24PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > If you do
> >
> > - int "Kernel stack size order"
> > + int
> >
> > then this rule will no longer be offered to the user and `make oldconfig'
> > (actually anythingconfig) will override whatever happens to be in .config
> > for KERNEL_STACK_ORDER.
>
> You're saying that making an option user-visible changes whether
> *config overrides .config? That's non-intuitive.
Yeah, I thought so. I discovered it by comparing the behaviour of your
patch against the behaviour of CONFIG_BASE_SMALL, fiddling around and
then saying "wtf".
> > I'm not sure if that's actually what you want, but if the current situation
> > is that a random CONFIG_KERNEL_STACK_ORDER=0 left over in .config will
> > break the kernel at runtime then I think something sterner than editing
> > defconfig is needed?
>
> That's a good point, but I think I do want it user-visible. If
> someone sees someething I suspect to be a stack overflow, I'd like to
> be able to tell them to bump KERNEL_STACK_ORDER and see if the problem
> goes away.
>
> As for something sterner, it turns out that Kbuild provides some
> support for this. So, drop the previous patch in favor of this one:
>
> Force KERNEL_STACK_ORDER to be at least 1 on UML/x86_64.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jeff Dike <jdike@linux.intel.com>
> --
> arch/um/Kconfig | 1 +
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>
> Index: linux-2.6.21-mm/arch/um/Kconfig
> ===================================================================
> --- linux-2.6.21-mm.orig/arch/um/Kconfig 2007-06-06 09:28:13.000000000 -0400
> +++ linux-2.6.21-mm/arch/um/Kconfig 2007-06-06 11:08:49.000000000 -0400
> @@ -278,6 +278,7 @@ config HIGHMEM
> config KERNEL_STACK_ORDER
> int "Kernel stack size order"
> default 1 if 64BIT
> + range 1 10 if 64BIT
> default 0 if !64BIT
> help
> This option determines the size of UML kernel stacks. They will
heh, fair enough.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-06-06 18:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-06-05 20:50 [PATCH 2/2] UML - Fix kernel stack size on x86_64 Jeff Dike
2007-06-06 0:00 ` Andrew Morton
2007-06-06 0:37 ` Jeff Dike
2007-06-06 1:20 ` Andrew Morton
2007-06-06 15:11 ` Jeff Dike
2007-06-06 18:03 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
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=20070606110314.c64f8234.akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=jdike@addtoit.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=user-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox