linux-kernel - Re: stack overflow on Sparc64

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: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0806201819430.25997@engineering.redhat.com>
Date:	Fri, 20 Jun 2008 18:22:33 -0400 (EDT)
From:	Mikulas Patocka <mpatocka@...hat.com>
To:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
cc:	sparclinux@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	agk@...hat.com
Subject: Re: stack overflow on Sparc64

On Fri, 20 Jun 2008, David Miller wrote:

> From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
> Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2008 14:44:24 -0700 (PDT)
>
>> I agree on both counts.  Although I'm curious what the average stack
>> frame sizes look like on x86_64 and i386, and also how this area
>> appears on powerpc.
>
> I also one to mention in passing that another thing we can do to
> help deep call stack sizes is to make call chains more tail-call
> friendly when possible.

... and remove -fno-optimize-sibling-calls?:

Makefile:
ifdef CONFIG_FRAME_POINTER
KBUILD_CFLAGS   += -fno-omit-frame-pointer -fno-optimize-sibling-calls
else
KBUILD_CFLAGS   += -fomit-frame-pointer
endif

--- maybe it could be better to remove it, instead of some inlining that I 
made. Or do you see a situation when for debugging purpose, user would 
want -fno-optimize-sibling-calls?

Mikulas
--
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/