linux-kernel - Re: 'global' rq->clock

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: <20080503234715.GA3507@elte.hu>
Date:	Sun, 4 May 2008 01:47:16 +0200
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:	benh@...nel.crashing.org, a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl, efault@....de,
	elendil@...net.nl, parag.warudkar@...il.com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, guichaz@...oo.fr, andi@...stfloor.org
Subject: Re: 'global' rq->clock


* David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> wrote:

> From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
> Date: Sun, 4 May 2008 01:38:25 +0200
> 
> > ah, good! It really looks like unnecessary overhead for the "simple 
> > IPIs". But ... i'm wondering ... what about softirq processing? Do these 
> > IPIs process softirqs on the way out? In that case the non-processed 
> > jiffies might be a problem.
> > 
> > it's all a bit messy. I wish we could start turning jiffies into a 
> > function (which would just read GTOD and estimate jiffies from there), 
> > but i fear we are not there yet ...
> 
> I think Peter Z. made a good point that we probably need to keep it 
> there for smp_call_function() receivers, so that the called functions 
> can test the context they are in accurately.

hm, good point, i missed that aspect.

	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/