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
| ||
|
Date: Thu, 29 May 2014 08:11:18 +1000 From: Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com> To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com> Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>, Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, linux-mm@...ck.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>, Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>, Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>, Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>, rusty@...tcorp.com.au, mst@...hat.com, Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com> Subject: Re: [RFC 2/2] x86_64: expand kernel stack to 16K On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 07:23:23AM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > We tried for 4K on x86-64, too, for b quite a while as I recall. > The kernel stack is a one of the main costs for a thread. I would > like to decouple struct thread_info from the kernel stack (PJ > Waskewicz was working on that before he left Intel) but that > doesn't buy us all that much. > > 8K additional per thread is a huge hit. XFS has indeed always > been a canary, or troublespot, I suspect because it originally > came from another kernel where this was not an optimization > target. <sigh> Always blame XFS for stack usage problems. Even when the reported problem is from IO to an ext4 filesystem. Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner david@...morbit.com -- 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