On Wed, Oct 25, 2006 at 04:02:03PM -0700, Kirk Bocek wrote: > > > Axel Thimm wrote: > > I can't say for sure, but I strongly doubt that anything has changed > > wrt XFS. And no stock kernel will be a safe player for XFS (unless you > > are on x86_64). The kernel-suspend2 kernels with 8k stacks are a much > > better choice for a kernel, then (available for FC5 and FC6). > > Well, I *am* on x86_64. Is 'kernel-suspend2' a kernel setting somewhere? Is > it > needed on x86_64?
Craig already answered what kernel-suspend2 is (thanks, Craig). I was suggesting the 8k variant of it which has 8k stacks because XFS is known to be a high stack consumer. For example running XFS and NFS together on 4k stack kernels is known to crash due to eating too much stack space. x86_64 has 8k stacks to start with and needs less stack space anyway due to having more register space, so you don't need special tricks to allow XFS or other stack space eaters to run on it. Summa summarum: Since you're on x86_64 don't bother about any of that (unless you run a 32 bit kernel version on it) -- Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
pgp1so4fRVNI5.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ ivtv-users mailing list [email protected] http://ivtvdriver.org/mailman/listinfo/ivtv-users
