[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170104141959.GC17319@node.shutemov.name>
Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2017 17:19:59 +0300
From: "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@...temov.name>
To: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
Cc: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
linux-arch <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux API <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>
Subject: Re: [RFC, PATCHv2 29/29] mm, x86: introduce RLIMIT_VADDR
On Tue, Jan 03, 2017 at 10:27:22AM -0800, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 3, 2017 at 8:04 AM, Kirill A. Shutemov <kirill@...temov.name> wrote:
> > And what about stack? I'm not sure that everybody would be happy with
> > stack in the middle of address space.
>
> I would, personally. I think that, for very large address spaces, we
> should allocate a large block of stack and get rid of the "stack grows
> down forever" legacy idea. Then we would never need to worry about
> the stack eventually hitting some other allocation. And 2^57 bytes is
> hilariously large for a default stack.
The stack in the middle of address space can prevent creating other huuuge
contiguous mapping. Databases may want this.
--
Kirill A. Shutemov
Powered by blists - more mailing lists