linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH][RFC] 4K stacks default, not a debug thing any more...?

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 19 Jul 2007 22:04:13 +0200 (CEST)
From:	Bodo Eggert <7eggert@....de>
To:	Denis Vlasenko <vda.linux@...glemail.com>
cc:	Bodo Eggert <7eggert@....de>, Jesper Juhl <jesper.juhl@...il.com>,
	Ray Lee <ray-lk@...rabbit.org>,
	Rene Herman <rene.herman@...il.com>,
	Matt Mackall <mpm@...enic.com>,
	Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	William Lee Irwin III <wli@...omorphy.com>,
	David Chinner <dgc@....com>,
	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH][RFC] 4K stacks default, not a debug thing any more...?

On Thu, 19 Jul 2007, Denis Vlasenko wrote:
> On Tuesday 17 July 2007 00:42, Bodo Eggert wrote:

> > > b) make 4K stacks the default option in vanilla kernel.org kernels as
> > > a gentle nudge towards getting people to start fixing the code paths
> > > that are not 4K stack safe.
> > 
> > That's the big NACK. It's OK for MM, where things are supposed to be in a 
> > not well-tested state, but for running possibly mission-critical systems,
> > you should take no risk.
> 
> Mission-critical machines are not supposed to have kernel configured
> with incompetent/careless sysadmin who didn't think about
> config choices he made at kernel build time.

Is it careless to asume good code quality for default options?
Does the 4K stack come with a big red warning about crashing the kernel?
(I just checked, it does not, only benefits are listed.)
Are 4K stacks so obviously flawed nobody would use them for reliable systems?
Or is each sysadmin supposed to read LKML in order to find out about the
pitfalls you designed for them?
-- 
Top 100 things you don't want the sysadmin to say:
55. NO!  Not _that_ button!
-
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/