linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] disable softlockup detection at boottime

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: <20080429141300.GA26461@elte.hu>
Date:	Tue, 29 Apr 2008 16:13:00 +0200
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To:	Dimitri Sivanich <sivanich@....com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] disable softlockup detection at boottime


* Dimitri Sivanich <sivanich@....com> wrote:

> > ah, sorry. But ... perhaps using threshold -1 would be the most 
> > intuitive setting? (for 'infinite timeout' ==> softlockup detector 
> > turned off) That way it all becomes configurable as part of the 
> > threshold? No strong opinion though.
> 
> Having the ability to switch it off dynamically would be nice to have, 
> but will need a little work yet.  Any solution should also minimize 
> the amount of time spent in softlockup_tick.
> 
> Either '0' or '-1' seems OK to me, but if '-1' turns it off, do we 
> allow a value of '0'?.

i think <= 0 should be the condition for "off". That means both -1 and 0 
would be OK.

	Ingo
--
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/