From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752201AbXDLXGf (ORCPT ); Thu, 12 Apr 2007 19:06:35 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752209AbXDLXGf (ORCPT ); Thu, 12 Apr 2007 19:06:35 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([66.187.233.31]:38545 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752192AbXDLXGe (ORCPT ); Thu, 12 Apr 2007 19:06:34 -0400 Message-ID: <461EBB68.8010408@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2007 19:06:16 -0400 From: Chuck Ebbert Organization: Red Hat User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.10 (X11/20070302) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jeremy Fitzhardinge CC: Andi Kleen , Andrew Morton , Tim Yamin , Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: [PATCH UPDATE] deflate stack usage in lib/inflate.c References: <461DED14.1070603@goop.org> <461E9BAD.8050202@goop.org> <200704122321.23318.ak@suse.de> <461EB938.6080807@goop.org> In-Reply-To: <461EB938.6080807@goop.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote: > Andi Kleen wrote: >>> (This was under Xen, but there's no reason it couldn't happen on bare >>> hardware.) >>> >> Hmm, does Xen perhaps not use interrupt stacks? > > Looks like that's all done in do_IRQ, so it should be independent of > whether its Xen or not. And the stack overflow check is performed on > the main stack, before switching to the interrupt stack. > Yeah, the do_IRQ thing is misleading because it makes you think the interrupt caused an overflow when all it did was detect a near-overflow condition. (The number printed is the amount of space left.)