linux-kernel - Re: x86: 4kstacks default

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: <20080420120250.4f496861@the-village.bc.nu>
Date:	Sun, 20 Apr 2008 12:02:50 +0100
From:	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
To:	Adrian Bunk <bunk@...nel.org>
Cc:	Shawn Bohrer <shawn.bohrer@...il.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: x86: 4kstacks default

> The code in the kernel that gets the fewest coverage at all are our 
> error paths, and some vendor might try 4k stacks, validate it works in 
> all use cases - and then it will blow up in some error condition he 
> didn't test.

Which you won't fix by changing the x86 defaults. More of a problem in
embedded small devices is the 8K allocation failing in the first place -
plus 4K x 80 processes == lots.

> And from a QA point of view the only way of getting 4k thoroughly tested 
> by users, and well also tested in -rc kernels for catching regressions 
> before they get into stable kernels, is if we get 4k stacks enabled 
> unconditionally on i386.

At which point some distros will simply patch it back no doubt.
--
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/