linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] x86_64: fix delayed signals

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: <alpine.LFD.1.10.0807121127110.2875@woody.linux-foundation.org>
Date:	Sat, 12 Jul 2008 11:28:12 -0700 (PDT)
From:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>
cc:	Török Edwin <edwintorok@...il.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Roland McGrath <roland@...hat.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Elias Oltmanns <eo@...ensachen.de>,
	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...sign.ru>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86_64: fix delayed signals



On Sat, 12 Jul 2008, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> 
> what I'm seeing is not super new; even 2.6.25 has the behavior already
> (and with latencytop it's very visible behavior; before changing the
> tunable I see 2+ second delays in user apps, after the tunable change
> they're down significantly)

Yeah, I think people said it's more visible, and pointed back to 2.6.23 or 
something being better. So no, I don't think anybody really claimed this 
as a regression from 25.

			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/