On 21/11/06, David Chatterton <chatz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> In the short term, the best workaround is to use 8K stacks.
Yeah, that's what I'm currently doing and the box seems more stable
(at least it has not crashed yet, but with 4K stacks it usually would
have by now).
> We do not see stack
> overflow problems with NFS + XFS + volume managers + disk devices.
Could the size of my devices be part of the cause? some of the logical
volumes I have mounted are multiple TB in size?
> Audits have been done in the past and will again be done in the future to try
> identify areas where XFS could use less stack space by reducing/avoid large
> local variables. Reducing the code path is far more difficult.
I realize that fixing the problem may be difficult. I just wanted to
make sure that people were informed that there is an actual problem
and provide as much info as possible so that perhaps in the future it
can be fixed... :)
I'm reading through the XFS code myself at the moment and I'll be sure
to submit patches if I spot something that could help reduce stack
> There is active discussion about reducing inlining:
Thanks, I'll check that out.
> I can't speak for the scsi stack usage.
> Thanks for traces, I've captured this information.
You are welcome. If you want/need more traces then I've got ~2.1G
worth of traces that you can have :)
Thank you for your reply.
Jesper Juhl <jesper.juhl@xxxxxxxxx>
Don't top-post http://www.catb.org/~esr/jargon/html/T/top-post.html
Plain text mails only, please http://www.expita.com/nomime.html