Phillip Lougher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
+static struct inode *squashfs_iget(struct super_block *s, squashfs_inode inode) +{ + struct inode *i; + squashfs_sb_info *msBlk = (squashfs_sb_info *)s->s_fs_info; + squashfs_super_block *sBlk = &msBlk->sBlk; + unsigned int block = SQUASHFS_INODE_BLK(inode) + + sBlk->inode_table_start; + unsigned int offset = SQUASHFS_INODE_OFFSET(inode); + unsigned int ino = SQUASHFS_MK_VFS_INODE(block + - sBlk->inode_table_start, offset); + unsigned int next_block, next_offset; + squashfs_base_inode_header inodeb;
How much stack space is being used here? Perhaps you should run scripts/checkstack.pl across the whole thing.
A lot of the functions use a fair amount of stack (I never thought it was excessive)... This is the result of running checkstack.pl against the code on Intel.
0x00003a3c get_dir_index_using_name: 596 0x00000d80 squashfs_iget: 488 0x000044d8 squashfs_lookup: 380 0x00003d00 squashfs_readdir: 372 0x000020fe squashfs_fill_super: 316 0x000031b8 squashfs_readpage: 308 0x00002f5c read_blocklist: 296 0x00003634 squashfs_readpage4K: 284
A couple of these functions show a fair amount of stack use. What is the maximum acceptable usage, i.e. do any of the above functions need work to reduce their stack usage?
Thanks
Phillip - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
