linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] sched/cputime: Mitigate performance regression in times()/clock

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:	Tue, 02 Aug 2016 15:26:23 +0200
From:	Mike Galbraith <mgalbraith@...e.de>
To:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Giovanni Gherdovich <ggherdovich@...e.cz>
Cc:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	Stanislaw Gruszka <sgruszka@...hat.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched/cputime: Mitigate performance regression in
 times()/clock_gettime()

On Tue, 2016-08-02 at 12:37 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 04:07:14PM +0200, Giovanni Gherdovich wrote:
> 
> > Signed-off-by: Mike Galbraith <mgalbraith@...e.de>
> > Signed-off-by: Giovanni Gherdovich <ggherdovich@...e.cz>
> 
> SoB chain is borken. Either Mike wrote the patch in which case you're
> missing a From: Mike header someplace, or you wrote it and Mike needs to
> be a Ack/Reviewed or somesuch.

Hohum, I told him to just take the credit (blame) if he intended to
submit, but he didn't listen ;-)  It was a demonstration that a much
bigger/invasive patch was doing the same thing in an indirect way. 

	-Mike