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
| ||
|
Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2008 13:36:42 +0100 From: Nadia Derbey <Nadia.Derbey@...l.net> To: Matt Helsley <matthltc@...ibm.com> Cc: subrata@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, ltp-list@...ts.sourceforge.net, containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org, cmm@...ibm.com, y-goto@...fujitsu.com Subject: Re: [LTP] [PATCH 1/8] Scaling msgmni to the amount of lowmem Matt Helsley wrote: > On Tue, 2008-02-19 at 18:16 +0100, Nadia Derbey wrote: > > <snip> > >>+#define MAX_MSGQUEUES 16 /* MSGMNI as defined in linux/msg.h */ >>+ > > > It's not quite the maximum anymore, is it? More like the minumum > maximum ;). A better name might better document what the test is > actually trying to do. > > One question I have is whether the unpatched test is still valuable. > Based on my limited knowledge of the test I suspect it's still a correct > test of message queues. If so, perhaps renaming the old test (so it's > not confused with a performance regression) and adding your patched > version is best? > So, here's the new patch based on Matt's points. Subrata, it has to be applied on top of the original ltp-full-20080131. Please tell me if you'd prefer one based on the merged version you've got (i.e. with my Tuesday patch applied). Regards, Nadia -- 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