From: Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Cc: Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
mingo@redhat.com, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org>
Subject: Re: x86: 8K stacks by default
Date: Fri, 02 May 2008 11:05:16 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87wsmdf54j.fsf@basil.nowhere.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20080502071542.GA713@elte.hu> (Ingo Molnar's message of "Fri, 2 May 2008 09:15:42 +0200")
Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> writes:
>
> The plan is to remove "this overflows my stack here and now" technical
> argument: we'll add the stack-footprint measurement tracing plugin from
> -rt to ftrace and get that upstream. In -rt's tracer we can measure,
> track and trace the exact worst-case stack footprint of a system, since
> bootup. It relies on the function tracer which looks at the current
> stack footprint at every given moment. It's not a statistical sample, it
> tracks the true worst-case stack footprint.
I had such a measurement patch a long time ago for 2.4 x86-64
(ftp://ftp.x86-64.org/pub/linux-x86_64/debug/stackcheck-1)
But the problem today is the same as it was back then: you can't
really get the production users with the nasty workloads who actually
trigger the difficult overflows to run something like this which has
quite high runtime overhead.
> _Then_ there can be no real technical argument about making the more
> robust 4K stacks the default.
You typoed: s/more/less/
-Andi
P.S. I agree with Alan that the interrupt stacks should be always enabled even
with 8k stacks.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-05-02 9:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <200805010359.m413xWBV014593@hera.kernel.org>
2008-05-01 9:19 ` x86: 8K stacks by default Alan Cox
2008-05-02 7:15 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-05-02 9:05 ` Andi Kleen [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=87wsmdf54j.fsf@basil.nowhere.org \
--to=andi@firstfloor.org \
--cc=alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk \
--cc=arjan@infradead.org \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/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