| 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: <alpine.LFD.1.10.0805071025310.3024@woody.linux-foundation.org> Date: Wed, 7 May 2008 10:27:59 -0700 (PDT) From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> cc: Matthew Wilcox <matthew@....cx>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@...i.umich.edu>, "Zhang, Yanmin" <yanmin_zhang@...ux.intel.com>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Alexander Viro <viro@....linux.org.uk>, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: AIM7 40% regression with 2.6.26-rc1 On Wed, 7 May 2008, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Wed, 7 May 2008 10:08:18 -0700 (PDT) Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote: > > > Which is why I'm 100% convinced it's not even worth saving the old code. > > It needs to use mutexes, or spinlocks. I bet it has *nothing* to do with > > "slow path" other than the fact that it gets to that slow path much more > > these days. > > Stupid question: why doesn't lock_kernel() use a mutex? Not stupid. The only reason some code didn't get turned over to mutexes was literally that they didn't want the debugging because they were doing intentionally bad things. I think the BKL is one of them (the console semaphore was another, iirc). Linus -- 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