> > Hi, > > > Why do we need page size independent stack size? It seems to have > > compatibility breaking risk. > > I don't think so. The current behaviour is clearly wrong, we dont need a > 16x larger stack just because you went from a 4kB to a 64kB base page > size. The user application stack usage is the same in both cases. I didn't discuss which behavior is better. Michael said he want to apply his patch to 2.6.32 & 2.6.33. stable tree never accept the breaking compatibility patch. Your answer doesn't explain why can't we wait it until next merge window. btw, personally, I like page size indepent stack size. but I'm not sure why making stack size independency is related to bug fix. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
