From: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman)
To: Keith Owens <kaos@ocs.com.au>
Cc: vgoyal@in.ibm.com, Takenori Nagano <t-nagano@ah.jp.nec.com>,
k-miyoshi@cb.jp.nec.com, Bernhard Walle <bwalle@suse.de>,
kexec@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] Handling kernel stack overflows
Date: Fri, 03 Aug 2007 06:36:23 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <m11wekn6bc.fsf@ebiederm.dsl.xmission.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <31700.1186113953@kao2.melbourne.sgi.com> (Keith Owens's message of "Fri, 03 Aug 2007 14:05:53 +1000")
Well we currently keep a struct thread_info on the stack
which while not as bad as task_struct has it's own uses
and implications which may limit what you are trying
to do.
That said a function like:
int call_on_new_stack(int (*continuation)(void *), void *closure)
{
struct task_struct *tsk;
struct thread_info *ti;
if (plenty_of_stack_space())
return continuation(closure);
tsk = current();
ti = alloc_thread_info(tsk);
if (!ti)
return -ENOMEM;
setup_extra_thread_info(tsk, ti, continuation, closure);
schedule();
}
Might make sense. Last I heard the block layer and xfs seemed
to have largely solved their problems with running short on stack
space, so I don't know if it is necessary but it certainly sounds
relatively simple and interesting.
Running short on stack space is a recurring theme so a function that
allows us to have a little more when we really need it and be able to
switch even x86_64 to 4K stacks would be interesting.
I'm not quite certain where we could insert calls to call_on_new_stack,
but it looks simple enough that it is worth coding up and playing
with. If the results are good it could be worth merging.
Eric
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-08-03 12:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-08-03 4:05 Keith Owens
2007-08-03 12:36 ` Eric W. Biederman [this message]
2007-08-05 2:25 ` Keith Owens
2007-08-05 3:42 ` Eric W. Biederman
2007-08-03 13:30 ` Adrian Bunk
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=m11wekn6bc.fsf@ebiederm.dsl.xmission.com \
--to=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=bwalle@suse.de \
--cc=k-miyoshi@cb.jp.nec.com \
--cc=kaos@ocs.com.au \
--cc=kexec@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=t-nagano@ah.jp.nec.com \
--cc=vgoyal@in.ibm.com \
/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®