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: Wed, 7 May 2008 15:35:38 +0100 From: Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk> To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> Cc: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>, Matthew Wilcox <matthew@....cx>, "Zhang, Yanmin" <yanmin_zhang@...ux.intel.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Alexander Viro <viro@....linux.org.uk>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> Subject: Re: AIM7 40% regression with 2.6.26-rc1 > But my preferred option would indeed be just turning it back into a > spinlock - and screw latency and BKL preemption - and having the RT people > who care deeply just work on removing the BKL in the long run. It isn't as if the RT build can't use a different lock type to the default build. > Is BKL preemption worth it? Sounds very dubious. Sounds even more dubious > when we now apparently have even more reason to aim for removing the BKL > rather than trying to mess around with it. We have some horrible long lasting BKL users left unfortunately. Alan -- 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