Hi!
> > It's trivial to calculate for DAGs -- directed acyclic graphs. It's
> > when the "acyclic" constraint is violated that you have problems!
>
> It may well be that interrupt stacks are a win anyway. If we can get the kernel
> struct out of the stack pages (which would fix some very unplea
Alan Cox wrote:
>
> > It's trivial to calculate for DAGs -- directed acyclic graphs. It's
> > when the "acyclic" constraint is violated that you have problems!
>
> It may well be that interrupt stacks are a win anyway. If we can get the kernel
> struct out of the stack pages (which would fix so
On Mon, 4 Jun 2001, Alan Cox wrote:
> > - the kernel stack is 4kB, and _nobody_ has the right to eat up a
> >noticeable portion of it. It doesn't matter if you "know" your caller
>
> Umm Linus on what platform - its 8K or more on all that I can think of
it's 8K-sizeof(struct task_struct).
Followup to: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
By author:Bill Pringlemeir <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel
>
> There was a discussion on comp.arch.embedded about bounded stack use.
> It is fairly easy to calculate the stack usage for call trees, but
> much more difficult for `DAGs'. Ie,
> Bill Pringlemeir <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> There was a discussion on comp.arch.embedded about bounded stack
> use. It is fairly easy to calculate the stack usage for call
> trees, but much more difficult for `DAGs'. Ie, a recursive
> functions etc. I don't know about the poli
> "Richard" == Richard Gooch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
[snip]
> I guess we should ask the question as to what's an
> acceptable usage. Theoretically, any amount could pose a
> problem, but that's hardly a useful position to work
There was a discussion on comp.arch.embedded about bounded
On Sunday 27 May 2001 15:21, Richard Gooch wrote:
> Akash Jain writes:
> > in fs/devfs/base.c,
> > the struct devfsd_notify_struct is approx 1056 bytes, allocating it
> > on a stack of 8k seems unreasonable. here we simply move it to the
> > heap, i don't think it is a _must_ be on stack type thi
Akash Jain writes:
> hello,
>
> in fs/devfs/base.c,
> the struct devfsd_notify_struct is approx 1056 bytes, allocating it
> on a stack of 8k seems unreasonable. here we simply move it to the
> heap, i don't think it is a _must_ be on stack type thing
I absolutely don't want this patch applied.
hello,
in fs/devfs/base.c,
the struct devfsd_notify_struct is approx 1056 bytes, allocating it on
a stack of 8k seems unreasonable. here we simply move it to the heap, i
don't think it is a _must_ be on stack type thing
-aki-
--- fs/devfs/base.c.origTue Apr 17 15:04:10 2001
+++ fs/dev
9 matches
Mail list logo