[RFC PATCH] riscv: reduce THREAD_SIZE from 16KB to 8KB for RV64
Jisheng Zhang
jszhang at kernel.org
Mon Feb 7 07:27:46 PST 2022
On Mon, Feb 07, 2022 at 08:35:54AM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 6, 2022 at 6:43 PM Jisheng Zhang <jszhang at kernel.org> wrote:
> >
> > After irq stack is supported, it's possible to use small THREAD_SIZE.
> > In fact, I tested this patch on a Lichee RV board, looks good so far.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Jisheng Zhang <jszhang at kernel.org>
>
> I can definitely see the value in this, in particular when you get hardware with
> small RAM configurations that would run a 32-bit kernel on other architectures.
>
> However, it's worth pointing out that all other 64-bit architectures use 16KB or
> more, so it is rather dangerous to be the first architecture to try this out in
> a long time. Some on-stack structures have a lot of pointers and 'unsigned long'
> members, so they need twice the space, while other structures are the
> same size either way.
>
> IRQ stacks obviously help here, but I don't think the 8KB size can be made
> the default without a lot of testing of some of the more rarely used code paths.
>
> Here are a few things that would be worth doing on the way to a smaller
> kernel stack:
>
> - do more compile-time testing with a lower CONFIG_FRAME_WARN value.
> Historically, this defaults to 2048 bytes on 64-bit architectures. This is
> much higher than we really want, but it takes work to find and eliminate
> the outliers. I previously had a series to reduce the limit to 1280 bytes on
> arm64 and still build all 'randconfig' configurations.
>
> - Use a much lower limit during regression testing. There is already a config
> option to randomize the start of the thread stack, but you can also try
> adding a configurable offset to see how far you can push it for a given
> workload before you run into the guard page.
>
> - With vmap stacks, using 12KB may be an option as well, giving you
> three pages for the stack plus one guard page, instead of 4 pages
> stack plus four guard pages.
>
> - If you can make a convincing case for using a lower THREAD_SIZE,
> make this a compile-time option across all 64-bit architectures that
> support both IRQ stacks and VMAP stacks. The actual frame size
> does depend on the ISA a bit, and we know that parisc and ia64 are
> particularly, possibly s390 as well, but I would expect risc-v to be
> not much different from arm64 and x86 here.
>
Hi Arnd
Thanks so much for all the suggestions. Item3 and Item4 look more
interesting to me.
Thanks a lot
More information about the linux-riscv
mailing list