xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: x86: 4kstacks default

To: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: x86: 4kstacks default
From: Andi Kleen <andi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2008 13:48:40 +0200
Cc: Adrian Bunk <bunk@xxxxxxxxxx>, 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: <480AA2B9.10305__23983.3358479247$1208657639$gmane$org@xxxxxxxxxxx> (Eric Sandeen's message of "Sat, 19 Apr 2008 20:56:09 -0500")
References: <200804181737.m3IHbabI010051@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20080418142934.38ce6bf4.akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20080419142329.GA5339@xxxxxxx> <6101e8c40804190735g17f1e0bj25c2bc0e2a6eac26@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20080419151911.GB1595@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <480AA2B9.10305__23983.3358479247$1208657639$gmane$org@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Gnus/5.1008 (Gnus v5.10.8) Emacs/21.3 (gnu/linux)
Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

> 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.

But what are a few crashes compared against the ability to run 50000
kernel threads on a 32bit machine? Something has to give in the aim
for useless checkbox numbers after all. 

-Andi


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