[lkml]   [2005]   [Mar]   [20]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectFunction stack size usage (was [PATCH][1/2] SquashFS)
    Andrew Morton wrote:
    > Phillip Lougher <> wrote:
    >>+static struct inode *squashfs_iget(struct super_block *s, squashfs_inode inode)
    >>+ struct inode *i;
    >>+ squashfs_sb_info *msBlk = (squashfs_sb_info *)s->s_fs_info;
    >>+ squashfs_super_block *sBlk = &msBlk->sBlk;
    >>+ unsigned int block = SQUASHFS_INODE_BLK(inode) +
    >>+ sBlk->inode_table_start;
    >>+ unsigned int offset = SQUASHFS_INODE_OFFSET(inode);
    >>+ unsigned int ino = SQUASHFS_MK_VFS_INODE(block
    >>+ - sBlk->inode_table_start, offset);
    >>+ unsigned int next_block, next_offset;
    >>+ squashfs_base_inode_header inodeb;
    > How much stack space is being used here? Perhaps you should run
    > scripts/ across the whole thing.

    A lot of the functions use a fair amount of stack (I never thought it
    was excessive)... This is the result of running against
    the code on Intel.

    0x00003a3c get_dir_index_using_name: 596
    0x00000d80 squashfs_iget: 488
    0x000044d8 squashfs_lookup: 380
    0x00003d00 squashfs_readdir: 372
    0x000020fe squashfs_fill_super: 316
    0x000031b8 squashfs_readpage: 308
    0x00002f5c read_blocklist: 296
    0x00003634 squashfs_readpage4K: 284

    A couple of these functions show a fair amount of stack use. What is
    the maximum acceptable usage, i.e. do any of the above functions need
    work to reduce their stack usage?


    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 14:11    [W:0.021 / U:25.716 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site