From: Bill Pringlemeir <bpringle@sympatico.ca>
To: Richard Gooch <rgooch@ras.ucalgary.ca>
Cc: aki.jain@stanford.edu (Akash Jain),
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, su.class.cs99q@nntp.stanford.edu
Subject: Kernel Stack usage [was: [PATCH] fs/devfs/base.c]
Date: 04 Jun 2001 15:39:02 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <m2ae3o11d5.fsf_-_@sympatico.ca> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0106031652090.32451-100000@penguin.transmeta.com> <E156o6c-0005AB-00@the-village.bc.nu> <200106040707.f5477ET11421@vindaloo.ras.ucalgary.ca> <m2elt011y6.fsf@sympatico.ca>
In-Reply-To: Bill Pringlemeir's message of "04 Jun 2001 15:26:25 -0400"
>>>>> Bill Pringlemeir <bpringle@sympatico.ca> writes:
> There was a discussion on comp.arch.embedded about bounded stack
> use. It is fairly easy to calculate the stack usage for call
> trees, but much more difficult for `DAGs'. Ie, a recursive
> functions etc. I don't know about the policy on recursion in the
> kernel, but I think it would be bad.
> Perhaps the checker could be modified to keep track of the call
> tree and find the largest value used in the tree. Each function
> will have a maximum, to which you should add the interrupt
> handling overhead, which would be calculated in a similar way.
> This will work if you do not allow re-entrant interrupts and you
> do not have any `cycles' in the function call hierarchies.
Sorry, I neglected the important case of `alloca', and other variable
length stack allocation functions/constructs. Maybe this becomes too
restrictive to be useful.
regards,
Bill Pringlemeir
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2001-06-04 19:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2001-05-27 10:12 [PATCH] fs/devfs/base.c Akash Jain
2001-05-27 13:21 ` Richard Gooch
2001-05-28 14:43 ` Maximum size of automatic allocation? (was: [PATCH] fs/devfs/base.c) Daniel Phillips
2001-06-03 23:55 ` [PATCH] fs/devfs/base.c Linus Torvalds
2001-06-04 0:03 ` Richard Gooch
2001-06-04 6:44 ` Alan Cox
2001-06-04 7:07 ` Richard Gooch
2001-06-04 19:26 ` Bill Pringlemeir
2001-06-04 19:39 ` Bill Pringlemeir [this message]
2001-06-05 6:10 ` H. Peter Anvin
2001-06-05 6:56 ` Alan Cox
2001-06-05 11:37 ` Andrew Morton
2001-06-05 21:38 ` Pavel Machek
2001-06-04 10:09 ` Linus Torvalds
2001-06-05 1:41 ` Dawson R Engler
2001-06-05 8:49 ` Ingo Molnar
2001-06-04 20:15 ` Daniel Phillips
2001-06-05 4:24 ` Paul Mackerras
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=m2ae3o11d5.fsf_-_@sympatico.ca \
--to=bpringle@sympatico.ca \
--cc=aki.jain@stanford.edu \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rgooch@ras.ucalgary.ca \
--cc=su.class.cs99q@nntp.stanford.edu \
/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