linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 05/10] x86

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: <47792295.8070001@sgi.com>
Date:	Mon, 31 Dec 2007 09:10:45 -0800
From:	Mike Travis <travis@....com>
To:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
CC:	Andi Kleen <ak@...e.de>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>, tglx@...utronix.de,
	mingo@...hat.com, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 05/10] x86_64: Use generic percpu

Mike Travis wrote:
> Ingo Molnar wrote:
>> * Mike Travis <travis@....com> wrote:
>>
>>>> Also for such changes .text size comparisons before/after are a good 
>>>> idea.
>>> x86_64-defconfig:
>>>
>>> pre-percpu                          post-percpu
>>>       159373 .init.text                       +3 .init.text
>>>      1411137 .rodata                          +8 .rodata
>>>      3629056 .text                           +48 .text
>>>      7057383 Total                           +59 Total
>> ok, that looks like really minimal impact, so i'm in favor of merging 
>> this into arch/x86 - and the unification it does later on is nice too.
>>
>> to get more test feedback: what would be the best way to get this tested 
>> in x86.git in a standalone way? Can i just pick up these 10 patches and 
>> remove all the non-x86 arch changes, and expect it to work - or are the 
>> other percpu preparatory/cleanup patches in -mm needed too?
>>
>> 	Ingo
> 
> I've tested some x86_64 configs but the UP model is currently broken so I
> haven't been able to test that. (the "fs/nfs/super.c" build problem with
> TASK_NORMAL and TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE undefined.)
> 
> Thanks,
> Mike

Sorry, I guess I didn't exactly answer the question.  Yes, these changes
are standalone. 

Thanks,
Mike
--
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/