>bfa has one function that probably uses too much stack space and a few >others that might be a problem. > >With CONFIG_FRAME_WARN=1024: > >drivers/scsi/bfa/bfad_im.c:939: warning: the frame size of 1604 bytes is larger than >1024 bytes > >and with CONFIG_FRAME_WARN=512: > > >drivers/scsi/bfa/bfad.c: In function 'bfad_fcs_port_cfg': >drivers/scsi/bfa/bfad.c:900: warning: the frame size of 676 bytes is larger than 512 >bytes >drivers/scsi/bfa/bfad_im.c: In function 'bfad_im_supported_speeds': >drivers/scsi/bfa/bfad_im.c:939: warning: the frame size of 1604 bytes is larger than >512 bytes >drivers/scsi/bfa/bfad_im.c: In function 'bfad_os_fc_host_init': >drivers/scsi/bfa/bfad_im.c:976: warning: the frame size of 736 bytes is larger than >512 bytes >drivers/scsi/bfa/bfa_fcs_lport.c: In function >'bfa_fcs_lport_fdmi_build_portattr_block': >drivers/scsi/bfa/bfa_fcs_lport.c:2010: warning: the frame size of 572 bytes is larger >than 512 bytes >drivers/scsi/bfa/bfa_fcs_lport.c: In function 'bfa_fcs_lport_fdmi_build_rhba_pyld': >drivers/scsi/bfa/bfa_fcs_lport.c:1803: warning: the frame size of 784 bytes is larger >than 512 bytes > For these specific cases, we declare some big data structures in the stack, which is not good and I will fix them. But is general, is passing 512 stack size check a requirement? This seems too strict for me since the default stack size is 8k. >Also, there are many comment blocks that begin with "/**", which means "beginning >of kernel-doc comment block" for Linux kernel code. :( > Not aware of this convention. I will fix them. Thanks. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-next" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
