From: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
To: "Martin J. Bligh" <mbligh@aracnet.com>
Cc: linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-mm mailing list <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@digeo.com>
Subject: Re: TASK_UNMAPPED_BASE & stack location
Date: Sat, 26 Apr 2003 10:37:11 -0400 (EDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0304261034180.27719-100000@chimarrao.boston.redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <459930000.1051302738@[10.10.2.4]>
On Fri, 25 Apr 2003, Martin J. Bligh wrote:
> Is there any good reason we can't remove TASK_UNMAPPED_BASE, and just shove
> libraries directly above the program text? Red Hat seems to have patches to
> dynamically tune it on a per-processes basis anyway ...
What could be done is leave the stack where it is, but have
malloc() space and mmap() space grow towards each other:
0 3G
| |prog | malloc --> <-- mmap | stack |
The stack will get the stack size ulimit size and the space
between where malloc and mmap start should be about 2.7 GB.
That 2.7 GB will of course by divided between malloc and mmap,
but the division will be done dynamically based on whoever
needs the space. Much better than the current static 1:1.7
division...
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-04-26 14:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-04-25 20:32 TASK_UNMAPPED_BASE & stack location Martin J. Bligh
2003-04-25 21:01 ` H. Peter Anvin
2003-04-25 21:10 ` Martin J. Bligh
2003-04-25 21:12 ` H. Peter Anvin
2003-04-25 22:02 ` Timothy Miller
2003-04-25 22:06 ` Martin J. Bligh
2003-04-25 23:15 ` H. Peter Anvin
2003-04-25 23:19 ` Martin J. Bligh
2003-04-26 0:11 ` H. Peter Anvin
2003-04-26 0:42 ` Hugh Dickins
2003-04-26 5:15 ` Martin J. Bligh
2003-04-26 10:40 ` jlnance
2003-04-26 15:39 ` Martin J. Bligh
2003-04-25 23:52 ` badari
2003-04-25 23:58 ` William Lee Irwin III
2003-04-26 14:37 ` Rik van Riel [this message]
2003-04-26 15:03 ` William Lee Irwin III
[not found] <20030425204012$4424@gated-at.bofh.it>
2003-04-25 21:54 ` Andi Kleen
2003-04-25 22:06 ` William Lee Irwin III
2003-04-25 22:10 ` Martin J. Bligh
[not found] <20030425220018$6219@gated-at.bofh.it>
[not found] ` <20030425220018$76b1@gated-at.bofh.it>
[not found] ` <20030425225007$3fae@gated-at.bofh.it>
2003-04-25 22:58 ` Andi Kleen
2003-04-25 23:13 ` Hui Huang
2003-04-25 23:02 Chuck Ebbert
2003-04-25 23:02 Chuck Ebbert
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=Pine.LNX.4.44.0304261034180.27719-100000@chimarrao.boston.redhat.com \
--to=riel@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@digeo.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mbligh@aracnet.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).