linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] Use tty

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: <469D2810.9080109@microgate.com>
Date:	Tue, 17 Jul 2007 14:35:28 -0600
From:	Paul Fulghum <paulkf@...rogate.com>
To:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
CC:	James Simmons <jsimmons@...radead.org>,
	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux console project <linuxconsole-dev@...ts.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Use tty_schedule in VT code.

Linus Torvalds wrote:
>> -	schedule_delayed_work(&tty->buf.work, 1);
>> +	schedule_delayed_work(&tty->buf.work, 0);
> 
> Is there any real reason for this?
> 
> I think that patch is bogus. Either it should stay at 1, or the whole work 
> should be a non-scheduled one instead.
> 
> Do we really need to handle it asap for the console, or is it ok to wait 
> for the next tick, like the regular tty case used to?
> 
> And if we need to handle it asap, why the "delayed"?

The scheduling is to move the processing out of interrupt context.
The receive data is often extracted from the hardware
at interrupt time and then queued for processing.

-- 
Paul Fulghum
Microgate Systems, Ltd.
-
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/