linux-kernel - Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/4] Redesign cpu

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, 25 Aug 2006 05:50:08 -0400
From:	Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com>
To:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>
Cc:	ego@...ibm.com, rusty@...tcorp.com.au, torvalds@...l.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, arjan@...el.linux.com, mingo@...e.hu,
	vatsa@...ibm.com, dipankar@...ibm.com, ashok.raj@...el.com
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/4] Redesign cpu_hotplug locking.

On Thu, Aug 24, 2006 at 09:17:04AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
 > We already have sufficient locking primitives to get this right.  Let's fix
 > cpufreq locking rather than introduce complex new primitives which we hope
 > will work in the presence of the existing mess.
 > 
 > Step 1: remove all mention of lock_cpu_hotplug() from cpufreq.
 > Step 2: work out what data needs to be locked, and how.
 > Step 3: implement.

this is what I planned to do weeks ago when this mess first blew up.
I even went as far as sending Linus a patch for (1).
He seemed really gung-ho about trying to fix up the current mess though,
and with each incarnation since, I've been convinced we're making
the problem worse rather than really improving anything.

		Dave

-- 
http://www.codemonkey.org.uk
-
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/