Messages in this thread | ![/](/images/icornerl.gif) | | Date | Mon, 14 Apr 2003 13:18:52 -0600 | From | Andreas Dilger <> | Subject | Re: top stack (l)users for 2.5.67 |
| |
On Apr 14, 2003 21:05 +0200, Jörn Engel wrote: > On Mon, 14 April 2003 19:25:53 +0100, Dave Jones wrote: > > On Mon, Apr 14, 2003 at 07:46:45PM +0200, J?rn Engel wrote: > > > +/* FIXME: should the below go into some header file? */ > > > +#define PRESTO_COPY_KML_TAIL_BUFSIZE 4096 > > > struct file * presto_copy_kml_tail(struct presto_file_set *fset, > > > unsigned long int start) > > > { > > > > so, presto_copy_kml_tail() is only called from > > presto_finish_kml_truncate(), which doesn't seem to be called > > from anywhere. What am I missing here? Or can this whole lot > > just be nuked ? > > No idea. I'm just trying to get the kernel into a state where the > kernel stack can be reduced to 4k relatively safely. > As far as intermezzo is concerned, I've never even heard of someone > using it and care accordingly. > > > If not, this patch introduces a problem. You're now > > calling a sleeping function (kmalloc) whilst holding > > a lock according to the comment above presto_finish_kml_truncate() > > Ack. Would it be ok to malloc with GFP_ATOMIC then, or would you > propose something different?
I've CC'd the InterMezzo mailing list (which is where the maintainers of this code live). Could someone please post a copy of the original patch to the intermezzo-devel@lists.sourceforge.net mailing list?
Actually, my recollection is that there was previously a patch posted for fixing this large stack usage the last time this came up.
Cheers, Andreas -- Andreas Dilger http://sourceforge.net/projects/ext2resize/ http://www-mddsp.enel.ucalgary.ca/People/adilger/
- 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/
| ![\](/images/icornerr.gif) |