linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/11] x86: convert to generic helpers for IPI function calls

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, 22 Apr 2008 18:22:17 -0700 (PDT)
From:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>
cc:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com>,
	linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	peterz@...radead.org, sam@...nborg.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/11] x86: convert to generic helpers for IPI function
 calls



On Wed, 23 Apr 2008, Nick Piggin wrote:
> 
> The "too expensive to check the shared queue" is one aspect of it. The
> shared queue need not have events *for us* (at least, unless Jens has
> changed the implementation a bit) but it can still have events that we
> would need to check through.
> 
> I don't think deadlock is a problem (any more than with multiple vectors).

I'm happy with it either way, but as pointed out by Ralf, for the MIPS 
version of the patch there aren't even other vectors available.

So sharing the vector is going to be a requirement on other architectures, 
maybe we should look at whether we can make it generic and peform well 
regardless?

			Linus
--
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/