linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/2][RFC] VFCIPI v3

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: <1185891957.12034.12.camel@twins>
Date:	Tue, 31 Jul 2007 16:25:57 +0200
From:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:	Gregory Haskins <ghaskins@...ell.com>
Cc:	linux-rt-users@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2][RFC] VFCIPI v3

Hi Gregory,

This patch set approaches the problem from the wrong angle (and has a
few problems due to that).

The idea to use a workqueue (or in your case workqueue-like) solution to
the problem is valid, however instead of re-using (and improving) the
current workqueue infrastructure, you re-implement it (with mistakes).

The solution currently in -rt uses regular workqueues to implement
schedule_on_each_cpu() - a drop in replacement for on_each_cpu() in the
context of -rt and useful outside of that if people do require such
functionality.

Your idea of using priority arrays in the workqueue is a good one,
please implement that for the regular workqueues.

Your idea that GFP_ATOMIC is broken in -rt is unfortunate, it isn't. The
whole allocator is preemptable - that is a feature!

Please keep up the good work, looking forward to those prio-workqueue
patches.

Peter

-
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/