linux-kernel - Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.20

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]

Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0612061334230.1867@scrub.home>
Date:	Wed, 6 Dec 2006 13:54:07 +0100 (CET)
From:	Roman Zippel <zippel@...ux-m68k.org>
To:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
cc:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Subject: Re: -mm merge plans for 2.6.20

Hi,

On Wed, 6 Dec 2006, Thomas Gleixner wrote:

> If I understand it correctly, Roman wants clockevents to be usable for
> other things aside hrtimer/dyntick, i.e. let other code request unused
> timer event hardware for special purposes. I thought about that in the
> originally but I stayed away from it, as there are no users at the
> moment and I wanted to avoid the usual "who needs that" comment.

Nonsense, one obvious user would be the scheduler, the current scheduler 
tick emulation is rather ugly and sort of explains why you need the 
special wakeup logic I saw in previous versions.
The scheduler should be completely separate from hrtimer, in the long term 
they might optionally not even use the same clock source (e.g. the 
scheduler would use a low resolution, but fast clock, while posix timer 
whould use the high resolution timer).

bye, Roman
-
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/