| 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
| ||
|
Message-Id: <20060826152500.34f56d01.akpm@osdl.org> Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2006 15:25:00 -0700 From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org> To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu> Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...l.org>, Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com>, ego@...ibm.com, rusty@...tcorp.com.au, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, arjan@...el.linux.com, vatsa@...ibm.com, dipankar@...ibm.com, ashok.raj@...el.com Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/4] Redesign cpu_hotplug locking. On Sun, 27 Aug 2006 00:05:25 +0200 Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu> wrote: > > * Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...l.org> wrote: > > > I personally doubt that it's the case that we'd want to accelerate > > inclusion - very few things actually do CPU hotplug, and right now the > > only way to even hit the sequences in normal use is literally just the > > "suspend under SMP" case that hasn't historically worked very well > > anyway, but was what made at least me personally aware of the problems > > ;^). > > there's also bootup on SMP that is technically a series of hot-cpu-add > events. That already tests some aspects of it. Maybe we should turn > shutdown into the logical reverse: into a series of hot-cpu-remove > events? > Would be logical, but we would want to avoid making CONFIG_HOTPLUG_CPU a requirement for SMP. - 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