| 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: Wed, 30 Apr 2014 13:14:37 -0500 From: Scott Wood <scottwood@...escale.com> To: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org> CC: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@....fr>, Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH] powerpc 32: Provides VIRT_CPU_ACCOUNTING On Wed, 2014-04-30 at 14:56 +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > On Wed, 2014-03-19 at 17:05 -0500, Scott Wood wrote: > > On Wed, 2014-03-19 at 22:52 +0100, Christophe Leroy wrote: > > > This patch provides VIRT_CPU_ACCOUTING to PPC32 architecture. > > > Unlike PPC64, PPC32 doesn't provide the PACA register. Therefore the > > > implementation is similar to the one done in the IA64 architecture. > > > It is based on additional information added to the Task Info structure. > > > > PACA isn't a register -- just a convention for how Linux uses a GPR. > > Maybe it's time to use it on PPC32 as well? > > PACA is actually a data structure and you really really don't want it > on ppc32 :-) Having a register point to current works, having a register > point to per-cpu data instead works too (ie, change what we do today), > but don't introduce a PACA *please* :-) What is special about 64-bit that warrants doing things differently from 32-bit? What is the difference between PACA and "per-cpu data", other than the obscure name? -Scott -- 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