| 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: <1211520987.18130.110.camel@localhost.localdomain> Date: Thu, 22 May 2008 22:36:27 -0700 From: Daniel Walker <dwalker@...sta.com> To: Ulrich Drepper <drepper@...il.com> Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] futex: fix miss ordered wakeups On Thu, 2008-05-22 at 22:24 -0700, Ulrich Drepper wrote: > On Thu, May 22, 2008 at 10:15 PM, Daniel Walker <dwalker@...sta.com> wrote: > > That's the problem we aren't just covering 99.99% we're trying to cover > > 100% of cases.. If we don't do it in that one case we may as well not do > > it at all. > > I have no problem with removing the other ordering. It was added > because it limited overhead. It is completely wrong to have everybody > pay for the needs for a very small minority. I think that ordering is something companies have been wanting for a long time.. I had a lot of people asking about it, I was glad when it was added.. However, it all falls down in the one case which we don't handle. I don't think the overhead for this is all that bad.. Consider that the worst performance case is the contended case, and this patch adds a very small amount of code. The vast majority of cases are un-contended , and it's already know to be slow in the cases which are contended. Daniel -- 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