| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20080322122903.GD15355@kernel.dk> Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2008 13:29:03 +0100 From: Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com> To: "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@...el.com> Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, npiggin@...e.de, paulus@...ba.org, tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...hat.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] Generic smp_call_function(), improvements, and smp_call_function_single() On Fri, Mar 21 2008, Luck, Tony wrote: > > My thinking was that it may need a bit of help to ensure that the init > > function for single call data works, > > The problem may be worse than that. I see that you have a per-cpu > "call_single_queue" on which you do some list operations. On ia64 > the per-cpu variables live at the same virtual address on each processor > with a per-cpu TLB mapping directing them to a different physical > address on each. This makes Linux lists very confused. Funky, how does accessing other CPU's per-cpu variables work on ia64 then? Perhaps I made some false assumptions. Unfortunately I have no access to any IA64 machines, so I either have to yank the ia64 bits (which is unfortunate, since Alan tests on those :-) or rely on a bit of help from you and/or others in getting that bit right. -- Jens Axboe -- 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