Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: which stack direction? | From | Andreas Schwab <> | Date | 15 Mar 1999 11:00:58 +0100 |
| |
Keith Owens <kaos@ocs.com.au> writes:
|> On Mon, 15 Mar 1999 08:12:39 +1300, |> Chris Wedgwood <cw@ix.net.nz> wrote: |> >On Fri, Mar 12, 1999 at 11:45:36AM -0800, Larry McVoy wrote: |> >> "Does it matter to Linux whether the stacks in user codes run up |> >> (pointer starts at a low address and increments to get more memory) |> >> or down (pointer starts at a high address and decrements to get |> >> more memory)? If it does matter, which is preferred?" |> > |> >As someone else has pointed out, if the stack doesn't grow down, then |> >it not so easy to make the stack and the heap grow towards each |> >other. |> |> Why? Stack starts at the bottom and grows up, heap starts at the top |> and "grows" down. There is no requirement for heap addresses to be in |> any particular order. When heap is full, just grab the next page below |> the lowest heap page, grab n pages if the entity requires more than one |> page.
Except that many, if not all malloc implementations "know" that the heap grows upward.
-- Andreas Schwab "And now for something schwab@issan.cs.uni-dortmund.de completely different" schwab@gnu.org
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |