linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH tip/core/rcu 07/23] rcu: Provide OOM handler to motivate lazy RCU callbacks

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:	Thu, 06 Sep 2012 15:46:37 +0200
From:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mingo@...e.hu, laijs@...fujitsu.com,
	dipankar@...ibm.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	mathieu.desnoyers@...ymtl.ca, josh@...htriplett.org,
	niv@...ibm.com, tglx@...utronix.de, rostedt@...dmis.org,
	Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu, dhowells@...hat.com,
	eric.dumazet@...il.com, darren@...art.com, fweisbec@...il.com,
	sbw@....edu, patches@...aro.org,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <paul.mckenney@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH tip/core/rcu 07/23] rcu: Provide OOM handler to motivate
 lazy RCU callbacks

On Thu, 2012-08-30 at 11:18 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> +       get_online_cpus();
> +       for_each_online_cpu(cpu)
> +               for_each_rcu_flavor(rsp)
> +                       smp_call_function_single(cpu, rcu_oom_notify_cpu,
> +                                                rsp, 1);
> +       put_online_cpus(); 

I guess blasting IPIs around is better than OOM but still.. do you
really need to wait for each cpu individually, or would a construct
using on_each_cpu() be possible, or better yet, on_each_cpu_cond()?
--
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/