linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH -rt] Preemption problem in kernel RT Patch

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20070806071345.GD5359@elte.hu>
Date:	Mon, 6 Aug 2007 09:13:45 +0200
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To:	"Beauchemin, Mark" <Mark.Beauchemin@...amorenet.com>
Cc:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -rt] Preemption problem in kernel RT Patch


* Beauchemin, Mark <Mark.Beauchemin@...amorenet.com> wrote:

> sorry..  I sent the wrong patch file.  There was a warning in the 
> other one.

> -       int                     xmit_lock_owner;
> +#ifdef CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT
> +       void *                  xmit_lock_owner;
> +#else
> +       int                     xmit_lock_owner;
> +#endif

could you please change this to use 'current' (instead of the CPU 
number) as the xmit_lock_owner unconditionally? That results in much 
fewer #ifdefs and far cleaner code.

	Ingo
-
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/