| 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: Tue, 26 Jun 2007 12:35:01 +0200 (MEST) From: Mikael Pettersson <mikpe@...uu.se> To: eranian@....hp.com, mikpe@...uu.se Cc: B.Steinbrink@....de, ak@...e.de, ingo@...e.hu, levon@...ementarian.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, oprofile-list@...ts.sourceforge.net, perfmon@...ali.hpl.hp.com, wcohen@...hat.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] Always probe the NMI watchdog On Tue, 26 Jun 2007 02:57:55 -0700, Mikael Pettersson wrote: > > Keeping parts of the PMU HW permanently reserved whether or not > > the watchdog is enabled would be a BUG. > > > True. But the upside is that you guarantee the activation of the NMI > watchdog will always succeed which may be a valuable property given the > goal of the NMI watchdog. Otherwise, if Oprofile or perfmon are active, > the NMI will fail to grab a single counter. That relates more to policy than mechanism. I for one don't consider the watchdog "sacred". I think it's entirely reasonable that if the watchdog is disabled (echo 0 > /proc/sys/kernel/nmi_watchdog) in order to give the _full_ PMU HW to something else, then that something else needs to be disabled (or otherwise instructed to give up the HW) before the watchdog can be reenabled. If you don't want to risk not being able to restart the watchdog, don't disable it. - 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