linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] Always probe the NMI watchdog

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]

Date:	Mon, 25 Jun 2007 21:36:17 +0200
From:	Andi Kleen <ak@...e.de>
To:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	Björn Steinbrink <B.Steinbrink@....de>,
	eranian@....hp.com, mingo@...e.hu, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	levon@...ementarian.org, perfmon@...ali.hpl.hp.com,
	oprofile-list@...ts.sourceforge.net, wcohen@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] Always probe the NMI watchdog

On Monday 25 June 2007 21:09, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Wed, 20 Jun 2007 20:34:48 +0200
>
> Bj__rn Steinbrink <B.Steinbrink@....de> wrote:
> > The performance counter allocator relies on the nmi watchdog being
> > probed, so we have to do that even if the watchdog is not enabled.
>
> So...  what's the status of this lot?
>
> I've just merged this patch and the second one:
>
> Subject: [PATCH 2/2] Reserve the right performance counter for the Intel
> PerfMon NMI watchdog Message-ID: <20070620183551.GC3251@...ola.homenet>
>
> but there was no followup discussion afaict.
>
> Andi, Stephane: acks?

Yes, although I'm still a little uneasy about the always probe one.

> If acked, do we agree that this is 2.6.22 material?

The first (always probe) is probably .22 material, but needs more testing 
first.

-Andi
-
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/