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: <alpine.LFD.0.999.0707171340360.27353@woody.linux-foundation.org>
Date:	Tue, 17 Jul 2007 13:42:34 -0700 (PDT)
From:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	James Simmons <jsimmons@...radead.org>
cc:	Paul Fulghum <paulkf@...rogate.com>,
	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.



On Tue, 17 Jul 2007, James Simmons wrote:
> 
> Because sometimes you do want the delay. In other parts of the tty 
> code we do delay.

Ahh, ok, in that it's ok by me.

> What should be done is 
> 
>         if (tty->low_latency)
>                 flush_to_ldisc(&tty->buf.work.work);
>         else
>                 schedule_delayed_work(&tty->buf.work, 1);
> 
> Is this acceptable to you?

In that case, we might as well just always do the scheduled_delayed_work() 
with a zero timeout as per the earlier patch. I'd still like to know who 
*cares*, though? Why not leave it at 1?

		Linus
-
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/