> The current proposal is sheer madness. The developers have NO IDEA what the maximum kernel stack usage is, and no way of determining it.
Then the current state is desperate as well: They don't have a clue if the current stack size limit is sufficient. Your dynamic stack size check would be a step into the right direction, but:
Most stack allocation should be easily statically determinable (with only small conservative overapproximations). Things like alloca (if there is a kernel equivalent) or any other means which change the stack size by a dynamically computed amount are more tricky. However, these should be avoided anyways if stack conservation has such a priority.
At least conceptionally, computing a call graph with conservative stack usage annotations should be fairly easy (using existing code in GCC). In the absense of recursion, one could easily determine the largest stack size in use. And again, if you value the stack size so much, you should not use recursion. (well, there might be valid use cases with a known maximal recursion depth of 3 or so which might be hard to check statically for machines and even if that is the case, you will need something slightly smarter than plain call graphs.)
Without such an automatic check, I pretty much agree with you.
[Disclaimer: I have basically no clue about the kernel source except of what I read occasionally on this page.]
Copyright © 2017, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds