[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20080908.125153.263452187.davem@davemloft.net>
Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2008 12:51:53 -0700 (PDT)
From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To: nickpiggin@...oo.com.au
Cc: travis@....com, mingo@...e.hu, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
steiner@....com, jes@....com, tglx@...utronix.de,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] smp: reduce stack requirements for
smp_call_function_mask
From: Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@...oo.com.au>
Date: Mon, 8 Sep 2008 20:30:41 +1000
> Is that being tried? Setting it to 8192 or even higher during QA seems
> like a good idea to me.
This is a great idea, especially since it will make it even more
painfully obvious that essentially any function local cpumask_t
variable is a bug.
Really, it seems sensible to do something like:
1) Make cpumask_t a pointer.
2) Add cpumask_data_t which is what cpumask_t is now. This gets
used when for the actual storage, and will only get applied to
datastructures that are dynamically allocated. For example, for
the cpu_vm_mask in mm_struct.
3) Type make and fix build failures until they are all gone.
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists