linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 9/9] RT: Only dirty a cacheline if the priority is actually changing

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <1192877087.4088.3.camel@ghaskins-t60p.haskins.net>
Date:	Sat, 20 Oct 2007 06:44:47 -0400
From:	Gregory Haskins <ghaskins@...ell.com>
To:	Roel Kluin <12o3l@...cali.nl>
Cc:	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
	RT <linux-rt-users@...r.kernel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 9/9] RT: Only dirty a cacheline if the priority is
	actually changing

On Sat, 2007-10-20 at 04:48 +0200, Roel Kluin wrote:
> Gregory Haskins wrote:
> > We can avoid dirtying a rq related cacheline with a simple check, so why not.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Gregory Haskins <ghaskins@...ell.com>
> > ---
> > 
> >  0 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> 
> I think you wanted a patch here?

Hi Roel,
  I had forgotten to refresh before mailing the patches, but I sent an
immediate followup (which unfortunately was not linked to the original
posting.  For your reference, here is the reposting:

http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.rt.user/1626

Sorry for the confusion!

Regards,
-Greg



Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (190 bytes)