From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG  Tue Apr 15 10:12:56 2008
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: current@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 71522106564A
	for <current@freebsd.org>; Tue, 15 Apr 2008 10:12:56 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from gnn@neville-neil.com)
Received: from outbound0.mx.meer.net (outbound0.mx.meer.net [209.157.153.23])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4F6038FC1F
	for <current@freebsd.org>; Tue, 15 Apr 2008 10:12:56 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from gnn@neville-neil.com)
Received: from mail.meer.net (mail.meer.net [209.157.152.14])
	by outbound0.mx.meer.net (8.12.10/8.12.6) with ESMTP id m3FACkiR088145; 
	Tue, 15 Apr 2008 03:12:53 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from gnn@neville-neil.com)
Received: from mail2.meer.net (mail2.meer.net [64.13.141.16])
	by mail.meer.net (8.13.3/8.13.3/meer) with ESMTP id m3FACH4p038642;
	Tue, 15 Apr 2008 03:12:17 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from gnn@neville-neil.com)
Received: from minion.local.neville-neil.com
	(61.204.211.246.customerlink.pwd.ne.jp [61.204.211.246])
	(authenticated bits=0)
	by mail2.meer.net (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id m3FACGSM088767;
	Tue, 15 Apr 2008 03:12:16 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from gnn@neville-neil.com)
Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2008 19:12:15 +0900
Message-ID: <m2wsmzv340.wl%gnn@neville-neil.com>
From: "George V. Neville-Neil" <gnn@neville-neil.com>
To: "Poul-Henning Kamp" <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
In-Reply-To: <3226.1208246794@critter.freebsd.dk>
References: <20080414213656.Q959@desktop> <3226.1208246794@critter.freebsd.dk>
User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.5 (Almost Unreal) SEMI/1.14.6 (Maruoka)
	FLIM/1.14.9 (=?ISO-8859-4?Q?Goj=F2?=) APEL/10.7 Emacs/22.1.50
	(i386-apple-darwin8.11.1) MULE/5.0 (SAKAKI)
MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI 1.14.6 - "Maruoka")
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Cc: Andrew Reilly <andrew-freebsd@areilly.bpc-users.org>,
	FreeBSD Current <current@freebsd.org>,
	Roman Divacky <rdivacky@freebsd.org>, Robert Watson <rwatson@freebsd.org>,
	Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org>,
	Jeff Roberson <jroberson@jroberson.net>
Subject: Re: stack hogs in kernel 
X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current
	<freebsd-current.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2008 10:12:56 -0000

At Tue, 15 Apr 2008 08:06:34 +0000,
Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
> 
> In message <20080414213656.Q959@desktop>, Jeff Roberson writes:
> 
> >> I've long wondered about the seemingly fanatical stack size concern in
> >> kernel space.  In other domains (where I have more experience) you can
> >> get good performance benefits from the essentially free memory management
> >> and good cache re-use that comes from putting as much into the
> >> stack/call-frame as possible.
> >
> >There is a small fixed kernel stack per-thread.
> 
> And in case anybody is about to forget: FreeBSD is still used on
> systems with a lot less than 1GB ram :-)

And we'd like it to be used on systems with even less :-)

Later,
George