xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: out of the tree compilation and 4KSTACKS

To: Chris Wedgwood <cw@xxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: out of the tree compilation and 4KSTACKS
From: Axel Thimm <Axel.Thimm@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 31 May 2005 23:54:02 +0200
Cc: linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <462608.672469a40d5f4a17f7b1f43a4517535a.ANY@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <20050531074820.GM8770@xxxxxxxxxxx> <462608.672469a40d5f4a17f7b1f43a4517535a.ANY@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Reply-to: linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
Sender: linux-xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mutt/1.4.2i
On Tue, May 31, 2005 at 02:28:23PM -0700, Chris Wedgwood wrote:
> On Tue, May 31, 2005 at 09:48:20AM +0200, Axel Thimm wrote:
> 
> > is it possible to add xfs support to a 2.6.9 kernel (e.g. the RHEL4
> > kernel) as an external kernel module?
> 
> yes

Hm, any pointers to "how"? ;)

> > Would that make sense w/ 4KSTACKS?
> 
> it does but it won't give you 8K stacks, the stack size is a property
> of the kernel and modules will inherit this

Sure, that's clear. What I mean is: If you turn on xfs in RHEL4's
kernel is it considered safe with 4KSTACKS? If not, that would make
the whole point of building the kernel modules out of the tree
meaningless.

lkml and this list sometimes consider NFS & XFS a dangerous
combination stackwise. Urban legend or is there truth to it?
-- 
Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net

Attachment: pgpZHaPXOOWO5.pgp
Description: PGP signature

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>