linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] x86_64: Auto size the per cpu area.

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 08 Aug 2006 01:29:26 -0600
From:	ebiederm@...ssion.com (Eric W. Biederman)
To:	Andi Kleen <ak@...e.de>
Cc:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>,
	"Randy.Dunlap" <rdunlap@...otime.net>,
	"Protasevich, Natalie" <Natalie.Protasevich@...sys.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86_64:  Auto size the per cpu area.

Andi Kleen <ak@...e.de> writes:

>> >
>> > However not that particular patch - i already changed that
>> > code in my tree because I needed really early per cpu for something and
>> > i had switched to using a static array for cpu0's cpudata.
>> >
>> > I will modify it to work like your proposal.
>> 
>> Sounds good to me.
>
> Actually i ended up going with your patch and dropping mine
> because of some other issues and I solved the problem
> that caused me to do the other in a different way.

Ok.

Since this is the agreed upon path, Andrew can you please pick
this patch up for the next -mm release?

Then the final practical question does it still make sense to decouple
the NR_IRQS from NR_CPUS?  As my other patch was doing?

Eric
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/