| 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: Tue, 25 Jan 2011 11:45:28 -0800 From: Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com> To: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/25] mm: Preemptibility -v7 Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl> writes: > This patch-set makes part of the mm a lot more preemptible. It converts > i_mmap_lock and anon_vma->lock to mutexes and makes mmu_gather fully > preemptible. > > The main motivation was making mm_take_all_locks() preemptible, since it > appears people are nesting hundreds of spinlocks there. Just curious: why is mm_take_all_locks() a problem? As far as I can see it's just used when starting KVM or GRU the first time. Is that a common situation? -Andi -- Andi Kleen Intel Open Source Technology Center -- 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