linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] reduce large do_mount stack usage with noinlines

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]

Message-ID: <20080206145439.4ef971f2@laptopd505.fenrus.org>
Date:	Wed, 6 Feb 2008 14:54:39 -0800
From:	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>
To:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	Eric Sandeen <sandeen@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] reduce large do_mount stack usage with noinlines

On Wed, 6 Feb 2008 14:34:57 -0800
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:

> 
> Does the patch actually help?  I mean, if a() calls b() and both use N
> bytes of locals, our worst-case stack usage remains ~2N whether or
> not b() was inlined in a()?  In fact, uninlining makes things a
> little worse due to callframe stuff.

it gets interesting at the three-way..
if a() calls b() and then calls c(), and they all use N,
the total usage is now 3N not 2N.

(although current gcc is already somewhat smarter about this, and 3N might actually be 2N for some cases)
--
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/