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: Mon, 25 May 2015 22:29:40 +0200 From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de> To: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@...s.arm.com> Cc: Jungseok Lee <jungseoklee85@...il.com>, Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>, "barami97@...il.com" <barami97@...il.com>, Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, "linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>, "linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org> Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 2/2] arm64: Implement vmalloc based thread_info allocator On Monday 25 May 2015 19:47:15 Catalin Marinas wrote: > On 25 May 2015, at 13:01, Jungseok Lee <jungseoklee85@...il.com> wrote: > > >> Could the stack size be reduced to 8KB perhaps? > > > > I guess probably not. > > > > A commit, 845ad05e, says that 8KB is not enough to cover SpecWeb benchmark. > > We could go back to 8KB stacks if we implement support for separate IRQ > stack on arm64. It's not too complicated, we would have to use SP0 for (kernel) threads > and SP1 for IRQ handlers. I think most architectures that see a lot of benchmarks have moved to irqstacks at some point, that definitely sounds like a useful idea, even if the implementation turns out to be a bit more tricky than what you describe. There are a lot of workloads that would benefit from having lower per-thread memory cost. Arnd -- 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