Re: [RESEND][PATCH] Mark thread stack correctly in proc/<pid>/maps

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



> Right now MAP_STACK does not mean anything since it is ignored. The
> intention of this behaviour change is to make MAP_STACK mean that the
> map is going to be used as a stack and hence, set it up like a stack
> ought to be. I could not really think of a valid case for fixed size
> stacks; it looks like a limitation in the pthread implementation in
> glibc rather than a feature. So this patch will actually result in
> uniform behaviour across threads when it comes to stacks.
>
> This does change vm accounting since thread stacks were earlier
> accounted as anon memory.

The fact is, now process stack and pthread stack clearly behave
different dance. libc don't expect pthread stack grow automatically.
So, your patch will break userland. Just only change display thing.
--
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


[Index of Archives]     [Linux Ext4 Filesystem]     [Union Filesystem]     [Filesystem Testing]     [Ceph Users]     [Ecryptfs]     [AutoFS]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Share Photos]     [Security]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux Cachefs]     [Reiser Filesystem]     [Linux RAID]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]     [CEPH Development]
  Powered by Linux