| 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, 07 Sep 2015 17:06:19 +0100 From: James Morse <james.morse@....com> To: Jungseok Lee <jungseoklee85@...il.com> CC: "linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm64: kernel: Use a separate stack for irq interrupts. On 07/09/15 16:48, Jungseok Lee wrote: > On Sep 7, 2015, at 11:36 PM, James Morse wrote: > > Hi James, > >> Having to handle interrupts on top of an existing kernel stack means the >> kernel stack must be large enough to accomodate both the maximum kernel >> usage, and the maximum irq handler usage. Switching to a different stack >> when processing irqs allows us to make the stack size smaller. >> >> Maximum kernel stack usage (running ltp and generating usb+ethernet >> interrupts) was 7256 bytes. With this patch, the same workload gives >> a maximum stack usage of 5816 bytes. > > I'd like to know how to measure the max stack depth. > AFAIK, a stack tracer on ftrace does not work well. Did you dump a stack > region and find or track down an untouched region? I enabled the 'Trace max stack' option under menuconfig 'Kernel Hacking' -> 'Tracers', then looked in debugfs:/tracing/stack_max_size. What problems did you encounter? (I may be missing something...) Thanks, James -- 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