mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Martin J. Bligh" <mbligh@aracnet.com>
To: Andi Kleen <ak@muc.de>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: TASK_UNMAPPED_BASE & stack location
Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2003 15:10:40 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <3600000.1051308616@[10.10.2.4]> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <m3sms644zz.fsf@averell.firstfloor.org>

>> Is there any good reason we can't remove TASK_UNMAPPED_BASE, and just
>> shove libraries directly above the program text? Red Hat seems to have
>> patches to dynamically tune it on a per-processes basis anyway ...
> 
> Yes. You won't get a continuous sbrk/brk heap then anymore. Not sure it
> is a  big problem though.

Me no understand. I think this *makes* it a contiguous space. The way I see
it, we currently allocate from TASK_UNMAPPED_BASE up to the top, then start
again above program text. Which seems a bit silly.

> It's probably worth a sysctl at least.

mmm. I'd prefer a config option. Defaulting to 'y' ;-)

>> Moreover, can we put the stack back where it's meant to be, below the
>> program text, in that wasted 128MB of virtual space? Who really wants 
>>> 128MB of stack anyway (and can't fix their app)?
> 
> You could, but I bet it would break some programs
> (e.g. just moving __PAGE_OFFSET on amd64 to 4GB for 32bit broke some
> things)

I've moved PAGE_OFFSET around a lot (which moves the stack, as you say). 
Haven't seen it break anything yet ... IMHO it was broken anyway if this
hurts it. Obviously not something one could do in a stable kernel series,
but 2.5 seems like a perfect time for it to me ... unless I'm missing some
glibc / linker thing, it seems like a simple change.

M.


  parent reply	other threads:[~2003-04-25 22:32 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <20030425204012$4424@gated-at.bofh.it>
2003-04-25 21:54 ` Andi Kleen
2003-04-25 22:06   ` William Lee Irwin III
2003-04-25 22:10   ` Martin J. Bligh [this message]
2003-04-25 23:02 Chuck Ebbert
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2003-04-25 23:02 Chuck Ebbert
     [not found] <20030425220018$6219@gated-at.bofh.it>
     [not found] ` <20030425220018$76b1@gated-at.bofh.it>
     [not found]   ` <20030425225007$3fae@gated-at.bofh.it>
2003-04-25 22:58     ` Andi Kleen
2003-04-25 23:13       ` Hui Huang
2003-04-25 20:32 Martin J. Bligh
2003-04-25 21:01 ` H. Peter Anvin
2003-04-25 21:10   ` Martin J. Bligh
2003-04-25 21:12     ` H. Peter Anvin
2003-04-25 22:02     ` Timothy Miller
2003-04-25 22:06       ` Martin J. Bligh
2003-04-25 23:15         ` H. Peter Anvin
2003-04-25 23:19           ` Martin J. Bligh
2003-04-26  0:11             ` H. Peter Anvin
2003-04-26  0:42         ` Hugh Dickins
2003-04-26  5:15           ` Martin J. Bligh
2003-04-26 10:40         ` jlnance
2003-04-26 15:39           ` Martin J. Bligh
2003-04-25 23:52 ` badari
2003-04-25 23:58   ` William Lee Irwin III
2003-04-26 14:37 ` Rik van Riel
2003-04-26 15:03   ` William Lee Irwin III

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to='3600000.1051308616@[10.10.2.4]' \
    --to=mbligh@aracnet.com \
    --cc=ak@muc.de \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®