linux-kernel - Re: [patch] high-res timers: UP resume fix

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: <1175939472.28263.518.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Date:	Sat, 07 Apr 2007 11:51:12 +0200
From:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Soeren Sonnenburg <kernel@....de>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Len Brown <len.brown@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [patch] high-res timers: UP resume fix

On Sat, 2007-04-07 at 11:47 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@...k.pl> wrote:
> 
> > > We do in on_each_cpu() unconditionally. I missed that.
> > 
> > BTW, the on_each_cpu() in clock_was_set() is unnecessary, because 
> > timekeeping_resume() is always run on one CPU.
> 
> yes - but that's not the only place where we do clock_was_set(), and the 
> on_each_cpu() is necessary in every other case. So i think the right 
> solution was the patch i did: to split the resume functionality from the 
> clock_was_set() functionality.

Right, I reused it and just did not notice, that interrupts are enabled
unconditionally in on_each_cpu().

	tglx


-
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/