linux-kernel - Re: RFC: revert request for cpuidle patches e11538d1 and 69a37bea

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:	Fri, 26 Jul 2013 23:48:36 +0200
From:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
To:	Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>, Jeremy Eder <jeder@...hat.com>
Cc:	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...ux.intel.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com,
	youquan.song@...el.com, paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
	daniel.lezcano@...aro.org, len.brown@...el.com,
	Linux PM list <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: RFC:  revert request for cpuidle patches e11538d1 and 69a37bea

On Friday, July 26, 2013 02:29:40 PM Rik van Riel wrote:
> On 07/26/2013 02:27 PM, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> > On 7/26/2013 11:13 AM, Rik van Riel wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> Could you try running the tests with just the repeat mode
> >> stuff from commit 69a37bea excluded, but leaving the common
> >> infrastructure and commit e11538?
> >>
> >
> > personally I think we should go the other way around.
> > revert the set entirely first, and now, and get our performance back
> > to what it should be
> >
> > and then see what we can add back without causing the regressions.
> > this may take longer, or be done in steps, and that's ok.
> >
> > the end point may well be the same... but we can then evaluate in the right
> > direction.
> 
> Works for me. I have no objection to reverting both patches,
> if the people planning to fix the code prefer that :)

OK, I'll queue up the reverts as fixes for 3.11-rc4.

Thanks,
Rafael

--
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/