[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Thread Index]
[Date Index]
[Author Index]
[dm-devel] Re: 2.6.24.2: 4KSTACKS + pcdrw + dm + mount -> stack overflow: ide-cd related? dm-related?
- From: Andrew Morton <akpm linux-foundation org>
- To: Nix <nix esperi org uk>
- Cc: Peter Osterlund <petero2 telia com>, Jan Kara <jack ucw cz>, dm-devel redhat com, linux-kernel vger kernel org
- Subject: [dm-devel] Re: 2.6.24.2: 4KSTACKS + pcdrw + dm + mount -> stack overflow: ide-cd related? dm-related?
- Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2008 12:30:41 -0800
On Sun, 24 Feb 2008 17:02:26 +0000 Nix <nix esperi org uk> wrote:
> On 24 Feb 2008, Peter Osterlund told this:
>
> > Nix <nix esperi org uk> writes:
> >> But while I'd normally blame pktcdvd there's only one pktcdvd function
> >> in these tracebacks (pkt_open) and it's not got a significant stack
> >> footprint.
> >
> > Did you verify that with "make checkstack" or just by looking at the
> > source code? On my system, pkt_open() consumes 584 bytes because the
> > compiler decides to inline lots of functions that would not normally
> > be part of long call chains. The following patch fixes that problem on
> > my system.
>
> I just looked at the source; I forgot `make checkstack' existed.
>
> On this system:
>
> 0xc0263e0f pkt_open [vmlinux]: 556
>
> which is nearly as bad.
>
> (As an aside, I'm surprised I didn't oops when packet-writing as well:
>
> 0xc021270d udf_process_sequence [vmlinux]: 692
> 0xc020f43d udf_add_entry [vmlinux]: 628
>
> owch. I guess that's called via a shorter call chain...)
udf_process_sequence() seems to be another victim of gcc inlining.
udf_add_entry() defines a couple of 256-byte local arrays.
[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Thread Index]
[Date Index]
[Author Index]