Re: [2.6 patch] i386: always use 4k stacks

Jörn Engel
2005-11-16T13:51:22Z

On Wed, 16 November 2005 13:57:36 +0100, Andi Kleen wrote:
>
> I think it's in general risky. It's like balancing without a safety
> net. Might be a nice hobby, but for real production you want a safety
> net. That's simple because there are likely some code paths through
> the code that need more stack space and that are rarely hit (and
> cannot be easily found by static analysis, e.g. if they involve
> indirect pointers or particularly complex configuration setups).

It isn't that hard to find such places. Trouble is that you find so
many of them and it takes quite a while to go through them all. Years
is a good unit for "quite a while".

Jörn

--
With a PC, I always felt limited by the software available. On Unix,
I am limited only by my knowledge.
-- Peter J. Schoenster