[Top] [All Lists]

Re: XFS, 4K stacks, and Red Hat

To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: XFS, 4K stacks, and Red Hat
From: Steve Lord <lord@xxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2005 10:01:17 -0500
Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxxx>, Nathan Scott <nathans@xxxxxxx>, linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx, axboe@xxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20050713144313.GD26025@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.58.0507071102460.4766@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <42CD4D38.1090703@xxxxxxx> <Pine.LNX.4.58.0507071142550.4766@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20050708043740.GB1679@frodo> <42D3F44B.308@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20050713015626.GD980@frodo> <p73eka31mkv.fsf@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <42D48780.2030500@xxxxxxx> <20050713041041.GV23737@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20050713144313.GD26025@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: linux-xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.2-1.3.3 (X11/20050513)
Christoph Hellwig wrote:
On Wed, Jul 13, 2005 at 06:10:41AM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:

In a previous life I actually had to resort to allocating a chunk of
memory, linking it into the stack, then carrying on down the call
chain (not on linux). The memory was freed on the way up the stack
again. I am not saying that would be a viable solution, but there needs
to be something done about stack overflow and nested subsystems, before
someone tries iscsi over IPV6 or something other bizzare combo.

ISCSI over something would be difficult again because that layering is invisible to the block layer. Maybe the iscsi block driver would need to declare how much stack it needs or do similar checks
by itself.

That iscsi driver needs very little stack because it hands off all work
to a helper thread.

Because it was running out of stack otherwise? ;-)


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>