lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2014]   [Jun]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: drivers/char/random.c: more ruminations
> So have you actually instrumented the kernel to demonstrate that in
> fact we have super deep stack call paths where the 128 bytes worth of
> stack actually matters?

I haven't got a specific call chain where 128 bytes pushes it
over a limit. But kernel stack usage is a perennial problem.
Wasn't there some discussion about that just recenty?
6538b8ea8: "x86_64: expand kernel stack to 16K"

I agree a 128 byte stack frame is not one of the worst offenders,
but it's enough to try to clean up if possible.

You can search LKML for a bunch of discussion of 176 bytes
in __alloc_pages_slowpath().

And in this case, it's so *easy*. extract_buf() works 10 bytes at a
time anyway, and _mix_pool_bytes is byte at a time.

>> I hadn't tested the patch when I mailed it to you (I prepared it in
>> order to reply to your e-mail, and it's annoying to reboot the machine
>> I'm composing an e-mail on), but I have since. It works.

> As an aside, I'd strongly suggest that you use kvm to do your kernel
> testing. It means you can do a lot more testing which is always a
> good thing....

H'mmm. I need to learn what KVM *is*. Apparently there's a second
meaning other than "keyboard, video & mouse". :-)

Normally, I just test using modules. Especially when working on a
driver for a hardware device, virtualization makes life difficult.
But /dev/random is (for good reasons) not modularizable.

(I can see how it'd be useful for filesystem development, however.)


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2014-06-11 07:21    [W:0.110 / U:0.096 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site