linux-kernel - Re: Dropping some patches from sched-devel

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: <3d8471ca0801250927r67d0a27es77f4176f89e7d8f7@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Fri, 25 Jan 2008 18:27:37 +0100
From:	"Guillaume Chazarain" <guichaz@...oo.fr>
To:	"Ingo Molnar" <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc:	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Dropping some patches from sched-devel

On Jan 25, 2008 5:58 PM, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu> wrote:
> sure, done.

Thanks.

> what method are you using of determining quality?

I was talking about code quality: adding a dependency on jiffies does
not seems like a good idea. But also, about the clock quality, I was
focusing on getting rid of underflows and overflows so relaxed the
checks. But I realized all these underflows are definitely needed. I
mean, the conversion from TSC to sched_clock always rounds to lower,
so overtime it lags a bit.

> Could you perhaps try
> to automate it? (even better would be some self-test within the kernel
> that detects badness)

I find the overflow/underflow/warps checks you added in the first
place to be sufficent. Not sure we want to add more tests to
differentiate between normal and abnormal drifts.

Thanks for your prompt reply.

-- 
Guillaume
--
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/