| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Thu, 23 Nov 2006 04:35:43 +0000 From: Al Viro <viro@....linux.org.uk> To: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> Cc: dgc@....com, jesper.juhl@...il.com, chatz@...bourne.sgi.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, xfs@....sgi.com, xfs-masters@....sgi.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: 2.6.19-rc6 : Spontaneous reboots, stack overflows - seems to implicate xfs, scsi, networking, SMP On Wed, Nov 22, 2006 at 08:10:13PM -0800, David Miller wrote: > From: David Chinner <dgc@....com> > Date: Thu, 23 Nov 2006 12:18:09 +1100 > > > So, assuming the stacks less than 32 bytes are 32 bytes, we've got > > 1380 bytes in the XFS stack there, > > On sparc64 just the XFS parts of the backtrace would be a minimum of > 2816 bytes (each function has a minimum 8 * 16 byte stack frame, and > there are about 22 calls in that trace). It's probably a lot more > with local variables and such. > > It's way too much. You guys have to fix this stuff. > > If TCP's full send and receive path can be done in less function > calls, XFS can allocate blocks in less too. > > I would even say 10 function calls deep to allocate file blocks > is overkill, but 22 it just astronomically bad. Especially since a large part is due to cxfs... - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists