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: <200804280200.20818.vda.linux@googlemail.com>
Date:	Mon, 28 Apr 2008 02:00:20 +0200
From:	Denys Vlasenko <vda.linux@...glemail.com>
To:	Eric Sandeen <sandeen@...deen.net>
Cc:	Jörn Engel <joern@...fs.org>,
	David Chinner <dgc@....com>, Adrian Bunk <bunk@...nel.org>,
	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
	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

On Monday 28 April 2008 01:08, Eric Sandeen wrote:
> >>>> Why xfs code is said to be 5 times bigger than e.g. reiserfs?
> >>>> Does it have to be that big?
> >>> If we cut the bulkstat code out, the handle interface, the
> >>> preallocation, the journalled quota, the delayed allocation, all the
> >>> runtime validation, the shutdown code, the debug code, the tracing
> >>> code, etc, then we might get down to the same size reiser....
> >> Just noticed this bit of FUD. Last time I did some static analysis on
> >> stack usage, reiserfs alone would blow away 3k, while xfs was somewhere
> >> below.
> > 
> > I'm sorry, but it's not what I said.
> > I didn't say reiserfs eats less stack. I don't know.
> > I said it is smaller.
> > 
> > reiserfs/*  821474 bytes
> > xfs/*      3019689 bytes
> 
> FWIW, the reason for that is in large part all the features Dave listed
> above, and probably more.
> 
> And, while certainly not yet tiny, the recent trend actually is that xfs
> is getting a bit smaller:
> 
> http://oss.sgi.com/~sandeen/xfs-linedata.png

~30% line count reduction? Impressive, especially in this age
of creeping bloat. Thanks.
--
vda
--
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/