At some point in the past, I wrote: >> If at some point one of the pro-4k stacks crowd can prove that all >> code paths are safe, or introduce another viable alternative (such as >> Matt's idea for extending the stack dynamically), then removing the 8k >> stacks option makes sense.
On Mon, Jul 16, 2007 at 11:54:38PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote: > Any x86-32 path unsafe with 4K stacks is almost certainly unsafe with 8K > stacks because the 8K stacks do not have seperate IRQ stack paths, so you > have the same space but split. It might be less predictable on 8K stacks > but it isn't absent. At hch's suggestion I rewrote the separate IRQ stack configurability patch into one making IRQ stacks mandatory and unconfigurable, and hence enabled with 8K stacks. -- wli - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/