linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] Remove unnecessary irq disabling

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20070502161356.GA8485@redhat.com>
Date:	Wed, 2 May 2007 13:13:56 -0300
From:	Glauber de Oliveira Costa <gcosta@...hat.com>
To:	Andi Kleen <ak@...ell.com>
Cc:	Mark Lord <lkml@....ca>, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Remove unnecessary irq disabling

On Wed, May 02, 2007 at 11:58:17AM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
> 
> > > What does that break, or was it already broken and this fixes it?
> > I think neither. This function is only called at early bootup,
> > (start_secondary() ), and most of its callees have interrupts off anyway.
> > But maybe we do lose something. Andi, do you have a word on this?
> 
> We need to enable them somewhere, but cpu_idle will do it in the end.
> So it should be safe to drop it. I guess keeping them disabled the whole
> time will be a little safer against potential races.
yeah, that's exactly what I've thought. We enable interrupts (to disable
them afterwards) in smp_callin(), to avoid waking up Mr. Watchdog. I
guess it won't be a problem after that, will it?
 
-- 
Glauber de Oliveira Costa
Red Hat Inc.
"Free as in Freedom"
-
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/