linux-kernel - Re: [patch] Change softlockup trigger limit using a kernel parameter

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: <20070720031244.GA5990@localdomain>
Date:	Thu, 19 Jul 2007 20:12:44 -0700
From:	Ravikiran G Thirumalai <kiran@...lex86.org>
To:	Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>
Cc:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, shai@...lex86.org
Subject: Re: [patch] Change softlockup trigger limit using a kernel	parameter

On Thu, Jul 19, 2007 at 11:51:14AM -0700, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
>Ingo Molnar wrote:
>> just in case someone sees false positives and wants to turn it off.
>
>Why not make 0=off?

A patch to disable softlockup during boot already went in.
http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git;a=commit;h=97842216b8400fe9d1a20468959e2989180f8f79

It uses kernel boot parameter to disable softlockup, not exactly disabling
softlockup at run time though.  Do we still need 0=off?

Thanks,
Kiran
-
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/