linux-kernel - Re: Does process need to have a kernel-side stack all the time?

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: <48060625.4040509@firstfloor.org>
Date:	Wed, 16 Apr 2008 15:59:01 +0200
From:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
To:	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>
CC:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Denys Vlasenko <vda.linux@...glemail.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Does process need to have a kernel-side stack all the time?


> well that and the fact that RH had customers who had major issues at fewer threads
> with 8Kb versus fragmentation.
> on 32 bit with a bunch of ram, there's just not enough lowmem around to not have it
> fragmented to hell and back.

2.6 VM has much more aggressive defrag heuristics than 2.4. That is what
I meant with likely obsolete.

-Andi
--
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/