| 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
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2006 21:14:55 -0700 From: ebiederm@...ssion.com (Eric W. Biederman) To: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...ux.intel.com> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [patch] Add allowed_affinity to the irq_desc to make it possible to have restricted irqs Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...ux.intel.com> writes: > Eric W. Biederman wrote: > >> There is still a question of how to handle the NUMA case but... >> > > the numa case is already handled; the needed info for that is exposed already > enough... at least for irqbalance What is the problem you are trying to solve? If it is just interrupts irqbalanced can't help with we can do that with a single bit. My basic problem with understanding what this patch is trying to solve is that I've seen some theoretical cases raised but I don't see the real world problem. 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists