| 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
| ||
|
Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2007 08:00:06 +1100 From: Con Kolivas <kernel@...ivas.org> To: Chuck Ebbert <cebbert@...hat.com> Cc: michael chang <thenewme91@...il.com>, ck mailing list <ck@....kolivas.org>, linux kernel mailing list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: [ck] Re: 2.6.20-ck1 On Sunday 18 February 2007 05:45, Chuck Ebbert wrote: > Con Kolivas wrote: > > Maintainers are far too busy off testing code for > > 16+ cpus, petabytes of disk storage and so on to try it for themselves. > > Plus they worry incessantly that my patches may harm those precious > > machines' performance... > > But the one I like, mm-filesize_dependant_lru_cache_add.patch, > has an on-off switch. > > In other words it adds an option to do things differently. > How could that possibly affect any workload if that option > isn't enabled? Swap prefetch not only has an on-off switch, you can even build your kernel without it entirely so it costs even less than this patch... I'm not going to support the argument that it might be built into the kernel and enabled unknowingly and _then_ cause overhead. Oh and this patch depends on some of the code from the swap prefetch patch too. I guess since they're so suspicious of swap prefetch the swap prefetch patch can be ripped apart for the portions of code required to make this patch work. Do you still want this patch for mainline?... -- -ck - 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