linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] x86-32: remove CONFIG

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: <20100616102051.GA7731@lst.de>
Date:	Wed, 16 Jun 2010 12:20:51 +0200
From:	Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
To:	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Cc:	Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>, x86@...nel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86-32: remove CONFIG_4KSTACKS

On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 11:21:36AM +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
> On Wed, 16 Jun 2010 11:16:21 +0200
> Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de> wrote:
> 
> > These days 4 kilobytes of stack just aren't enough for reliably operation,
> > and people using lots of threads have long switched to x86-64, so remove the
> > CONFIG_4KSTACKS option.
> 
> It's very useful for things like debugging and because of the split
> kernel/irq stacks.

Ingo just ACKed my previous patch to make irq stacks unconditional.

> It also seems to be quite adequate for most
> configurations.

See the direct reclaim flamewar.  Currently we can end up in ->writepage
from af_unix poll code with over 3k stack alreay used.  It's certainly
not anywhere near enough.

> Perhaps XFS should select 8K stack instead ?

or rather !CONFIG_INSANE.  I don't care too much.  No one sane should
ever enable it anymore, but Ingo asked me to send a patch to remove it.
--
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/