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]
Date:	Mon, 6 Aug 2007 17:18:14 +0400
From:	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...sign.ru>
To:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc:	Gregory Haskins <ghaskins@...ell.com>,
	Daniel Walker <dwalker@...sta.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	linux-rt-users@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] RT: Add priority-queuing and priority-inheritance to workqueue infrastructure

Gregory, Ingo,

On 08/06, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> 
> * Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...sign.ru> wrote:
> 
> > On 08/01, Gregory Haskins wrote:
> > >
> > > On Thu, 2007-08-02 at 02:22 +0400, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > > 
> > > > No,
> > > 
> > > You sure are a confident one ;)
> > 
> > Yeah, this is a rare case when I am very sure I am right ;)
> > 
> > I strongly believe you guys take a _completely_ wrong approach. 
> > queue_work() should _not_ take the priority of the caller into 
> > account, this is bogus.
> 
> Oleg, i'd like to make it sure that the role of Gregory Haskins is clear 
> here: he submitted some new infrastructure into the -rt tree, and i 
> reviewed that but found it quite complex and duplicative and suggested 
> him to think about enhancing workqueues with priority properties - which 
> might or might not make sense.
> 
> It is not the intention of the -rt project to pester any upstream 
> maintainer with -rt issues if that upstream maintainer is not interested 
> in it ... so please just forget about all this if you are not interested 
> in it, we'll sort it out within -rt. Thanks,

I am not trying to sabotage these changes, and I am sorry if it looked
that way.

I jumped into this discuassion because both patches I saw (Daniel's and
Gregory's) were very wrong technically.

Yes, I still disagree with the whole idea because I hope we can make
something more simpler to solve the problem, but I must admit I don't
quite understand what the problem is.

So, please consider a noise from my side as my attempt to help. And
in fact, I am very curious about -rt tree, just I never had a time
to study it :)

Oleg.

-
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/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ