From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S264496AbTEJUag (ORCPT ); Sat, 10 May 2003 16:30:36 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S264495AbTEJUag (ORCPT ); Sat, 10 May 2003 16:30:36 -0400 Received: from imladris.demon.co.uk ([193.237.130.41]:13440 "EHLO lapdancer.baythorne.internal") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S264496AbTEJUaf (ORCPT ); Sat, 10 May 2003 16:30:35 -0400 Subject: Re: A way to shrink process impact on kernel memory usage? From: David Woodhouse To: Timothy Miller Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List In-Reply-To: <3EBBE10C.4060900@techsource.com> References: <3EBBE10C.4060900@techsource.com> Content-Type: text/plain Organization: Message-Id: <1052599390.1881.7.camel@lapdancer.baythorne.internal> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.2.2 (1.2.2-5.dwmw2) Date: Sat, 10 May 2003 21:43:10 +0100 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, 2003-05-09 at 18:10, Timothy Miller wrote: > Why not allocate an 8k space and put various process-related data > structures at the beginning of it? Sure, a stack overflow could > corrupt that data, but a stack overflow would be disasterous anyhow. No reason why not at all. That's why we've been doing it this way for years ;) -- dwmw2