| 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: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0702252352310.32309@parallax.ddns.shef.ac.uk> Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2007 23:58:48 +0000 (GMT) From: "J.J.Green" <j.j.green@...ffield.ac.uk> To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, sparclinux@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: sparc64 / bbc_i2c.c Hi Andrew > The code around there looks relatively unbuggy to me. Removing that > remove_wait_queue() would be very bad - it would cause later stack > corruption. > > msleep_interruptible() certainly shouldn't consume CPU like that. Do we > know where the CPU time is being spent? The output of: > > readprofile -r > sleep 10 > readprofile -n -v -m /boot/System.map | sort -n -k 3 | tail -40 > > would tell us. As was mentioned in another reply, this message by Joerg Friedrich http://lists.debian.org/debian-sparc/2007/02/msg00045.html gives a possible explanantion of where the time is going. I applied the patch to the debian kernel sources for 2.6.18, it applied cleanly and fixed the problem. I have the upatched kernel in /boot so I can run the tests you mentioned fairly easily -- please let me know if you'd still like me to do that. Jim -- J.J. Green, Dept. Applied Mathematics, Hicks Bld., University of Sheffield, UK. +44 (0114) 222 3742 http://pdfb.wiredworkplace.net/pub/jjg - 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