linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] Force rcutorture tasks to spread over CPUs

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: <20070626161317.767d5ec0.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date:	Tue, 26 Jun 2007 16:13:17 -0700
From:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mingo@...e.hu, josh@...edesktop.org,
	dipankar@...ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Force rcutorture tasks to spread over CPUs

On Tue, 12 Jun 2007 21:28:04 -0700
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:

> +	while (!startwriters)
> +		barrier();	/* Force scheduler to spread over CPUs. */

one wonders whether a cpu_relax() would be a bit nicer here.  That implicitly
does a barrier().

This patch doesn't make much sense for non-SMP builds?
-
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/