On Mon, 8 Oct 2007, Nick Piggin wrote:

quoted text
> The tight memory restrictions on stack usage do not come about because
> of the difficulty in increasing the stack size :) It is because we want to
> keep stack sizes small!
> 
> Increasing the stack size 4K uses another 4MB of memory for every 1000
> threads you have, right?
> 
> It would take a lot of good reason to move away from the general direction
> we've been taking over the past years that 4/8K stacks are a good idea for
> regular 32 and 64 bit builds in general.

We already use 32k stacks on IA64. So the memory argument fail there.

quoted text
> > I have some concerns about the medium NUMA systems (a few dozen of nodes)
> > also running out of stack since more data is placed on the stack through
> > the policy layer and since we may end up with a couple of stacked
> > filesystems. Most of the current NUMA systems on x86_64 are basically
> > two nodes on one motherboard. The use of NUMA controls is likely
> > limited there and the complexity of the filesystems is also not high.
> 
> The solution has until now always been to fix the problems so they don't
> use so much stack. Maybe a bigger stack is OK for you for 1024+ CPU
> systems, but I don't think you'd be able to make that assumption for most
> normal systems.

Yes that is why I made the stack size configurable.

-
unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/