Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 24 Jan 2005 20:36:25 -0500 (EST)
From:      Daniel Eischen <deischen@freebsd.org>
To:        Joe Marcus Clarke <marcus@freebsd.org>
Cc:        Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org>
Subject:   Re: [PATCH] Dynamic thread stack size
Message-ID:  <Pine.GSO.4.43.0501242033010.19951-100000@sea.ntplx.net>
In-Reply-To: <1106613857.28710.66.camel@shumai.marcuscom.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 24 Jan 2005, Joe Marcus Clarke wrote:

> On Mon, 2005-01-24 at 19:41 -0500, Daniel Eischen wrote:
> > On Mon, 24 Jan 2005, Joe Marcus Clarke wrote:
> >
> > > Ah, okay, I suspected that was the case for libc_r, but I wasn't sure if
> > > the same thing held for all threading libraries.
> > >
> > > What about increasing the default stack sizes as you've said you wanted
> > > to do, plus leaving in the environment variable to aid in transition
> > > should the stack size have to be bumped again in the future?  This would
> >
> > I don't want an environment variable :-)
>
> Why?  I've listed two good reasons for having some way of dynamically
> tuning thread stacks.  What are the downsides?

Because I don't want anyone to have to rely on environment variables
to get things to work.  There's already a POSIX way to set stacks
which should be used if you want to use something other than default.
That's what should be used, not an environment variable.

> > >
> > > INITIAL (32-bit): 2 MB
> > > INITIAL (64-bit) 4 MB
> >
> > I think I was going to make the initial bigger than that (I forgot
> > what I chose).
> >
> > > DEFAULT (32-bit): 1 MB
> > > DEFAULT (64-bit): 2 MB
> >
> > Yes, I think that's what I was planning for other-than-initial threads.
>
> When do you plan to commit the changes?

As soon as I can.

-- 
DE



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.GSO.4.43.0501242033010.19951-100000>