linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V15 00/11] x86: Intel Cache Allocation Technology Support

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 4 Nov 2015 16:28:04 +0100 (CET)
From:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To:	Luiz Capitulino <lcapitulino@...hat.com>
cc:	Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@...el.com>, H Peter Anvin <hpa@...or.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	x86 <x86@...nel.org>,
	Vikas Shivappa <vikas.shivappa@...ux.intel.com>,
	Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@...hat.com>, tj@...nel.org,
	riel@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH V15 00/11] x86: Intel Cache Allocation Technology
 Support

On Wed, 4 Nov 2015, Luiz Capitulino wrote:
> On Wed, 4 Nov 2015 15:57:41 +0100 (CET)
> Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de> wrote:
> 
> > On Wed, 4 Nov 2015, Luiz Capitulino wrote:
> > 
> > > On Thu,  1 Oct 2015 23:09:34 -0700
> > > Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@...el.com> wrote:
> > > 
> > > > This series has some preparatory patches and Intel cache allocation
> > > > support.
> > > 
> > > Ping? What's the status of this series?
> > 
> > We still need to agree on the user space interface which is the
> > hardest part of it....
> 
> My understanding is that two interfaces have been proposed: the cgroups
> one and an API based on syscalls or ioctls.
> 
> Are those proposals mutual exclusive? What about having the cgroups one
> merged IFF it's useful, and having the syscall API later if really
> needed?
> 
> I don't want to make the wrong decision, but the cgroups interface is
> here. Holding it while we discuss a perfect interface that doesn't
> even exist will just do a bad service for users.

Well, no. We do not just introduce a random user space ABI simply
because we have to support it forever.

Thanks,

	tglx

--
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/