| To: | Adrian Bunk <bunk@xxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: x86: 4kstacks default |
| From: | Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Sat, 19 Apr 2008 20:56:09 -0500 |
| Cc: | Oliver Pinter <oliver.pntr@xxxxxxxxx>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxx>, Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Arjan van de Ven <arjan@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, David Chinner <dgc@xxxxxxx>, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <20080419151911.GB1595@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| References: | <200804181737.m3IHbabI010051@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20080418142934.38ce6bf4.akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20080419142329.GA5339@xxxxxxx> <6101e8c40804190735g17f1e0bj25c2bc0e2a6eac26@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20080419151911.GB1595@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Sender: | xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| User-agent: | Thunderbird 2.0.0.12 (Macintosh/20080213) |
Adrian Bunk wrote: > On Sat, Apr 19, 2008 at 04:35:31PM +0200, Oliver Pinter wrote: >> ... >> with the older kernel is typical: xfs+nfs+4k stack(+lvm) > > Does anyone still experience problems with 2.6.25? There are always problems. You can always come up with something that will crash in 4k, IMHO. Rather than foisting this upon everyone, I'd rather see work put into making stack size a boot parameter or something, so that people can choose what's appropriate for their workload (or their IO stack, if you prefer). -Eric > We all know that there once were problems, but if there are any left > they should be reported and fixed. > >> Thanks, >> Oliver > > cu > Adrian > |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: x86: 4kstacks default, Oliver Pinter |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: review: add a splice command to xfs_io, Eric Sandeen |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: x86: 4kstacks default, Oliver Pinter |
| Next by Thread: | Re: x86: 4kstacks default, Adrian Bunk |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |