linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 -tip] sched: Clean unused fields from struct rq

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, 24 Mar 2009 18:22:05 +0000
From:	Luis Henriques <henrix@...o.pt>
To:	Gregory Haskins <ghaskins@...ell.com>
Cc:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 -tip] sched: Clean unused fields from struct rq

Hi,

On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 11:59:34AM -0400, Gregory Haskins wrote:
> > How about moving schedstat to Documentation/sched/schedstat.c or so? 
> > It's small and trivial enough, and that way changes would go hand in 
> > hand with the app.
> >   
> Oh, I misunderstood.  The tool patch I was referencing is for my
> schedtop tool that is in a separate tree and written in C++.   In
> retrospect, you probably don't care about the relative state of my tool
> coincident with the kernel side change, then.  I agree that this other
> schedstat tool should probably be in-tree and patched at the same time
> as Luis' kernel patch.
> 
> FWIW: I have no problem with schedtop.cc going into the kernel as well
> if that is what you would like, but I figured I would be burned at the
> stake for suggestion such heresy as C++ in the tree ;)

I also agree that there will be issues adding schedtop to the kernel tree, for
two reasons: 1) it is written in C++ 2) it has dependencies on external
libraries (libboost).  So, unless the tool is re-written, I guess it will be
difficult have it accepted.  But that's just me saying this :-)

Now, to summarise and to check I understood everything correctly: I need to
resend my patch (the kernel patch), adding a reference to the URL where
schedtop can be obtained.  Is this correct?  Shall I use the URL to the git
repository or to the rt wiki?  Or both?

-- 
Luis Henriques
--
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/