Bug#204691: libc6: stacksize is too small
On Sun, Aug 31, 2003 at 11:00:52AM +0900, GOTO Masanori wrote:
> At 30 Aug 2003 19:27:36 +0100,
> Philip Blundell wrote:
> >
> > On Sat, 2003-08-30 at 17:45, GOTO Masanori wrote:
> > > I wonder it's really safe. If we create a lot of threads like Java
> > > EJB environment, we consume virtual memory four times faster than the
> > > current implementation. You find STACK_SIZE is a boundary for each
> > > thread. The right way is to support floating stack (thus libc6-686)
> > > or nptl + tls, I think. I'm afraid this patch affects badly.
> >
> > Ah. Does Java really create that many threads?
>
> Yes, especially enterprise Java environment creates more than 100
> threads at the same time. Could you drop this patch?
>
> At Sat, 30 Aug 2003 17:30:13 -0400,
> Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> > On Sat, Aug 30, 2003 at 08:02:05PM +0100, Philip Blundell wrote:
> > > On Sat, 2003-08-30 at 18:50, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> > > > Or get back to having an i686 libc... this is one of the major
> > > > advantages.
> > >
> > > Yes, indeed. Did we ever manage to find a way to make upgrades safe
> > > with this? I guess we could ship both the i386 and i686 versions in the
> > > same package, which would avoid any problems at the risk of angering
> > > non-i686 users.
> >
> > I think that would be safe. I also think it's a good idea. Doesn't
> > dpkg have a filter-directories feature, or did that never happen? Hmm,
> > looks like it never happened.
> >
> > If we had versioned provides, we could do it that way instead...
>
> Yes, I agree. Only concern is where do we put ld-linux.so.2 -
> /lib/ld-linux.so.2 (i386) and /lib/i686/ld-linux.so.2 (i686) ?
RH doesn't even bother with an i686 version of ld-linux.so.2. Just
libc, libm, libpthread, librt.
> BTW, the big problem is that application using linuxthreads gets
> sigsegv when I use glibc which compiled with -march=i686 option. This
> is the reason why I have not introduced libc6-i686 for a long time.
> It breaks after issuing modify_ldt instruction. I guess Redhat patch
> has some workaround modifications, or it's toolchain issue. It needs
> more investigations for supporting i686 libc6, tls, and nptl.
Do you have a patch to build these libraries from the debian source?
If you'll post one to debian-glibc I'll investigate it. I use an i686
glibc built from similar sources all the time without trouble.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer
Reply to: