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: Sun, 13 Jul 2008 20:19:10 +0200 From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu> To: Dmitry Adamushko <dmitry.adamushko@...il.com> Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>, Vegard Nossum <vegard.nossum@...il.com>, Paul Menage <menage@...gle.com>, Max Krasnyansky <maxk@...lcomm.com>, Paul Jackson <pj@....com>, Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>, miaox@...fujitsu.com, rostedt@...dmis.org, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: current linux-2.6.git: cpusets completely broken * Dmitry Adamushko <dmitry.adamushko@...il.com> wrote: > > So instead of this illogical and crazy mess: > > > > + switch (phase) { > > + case CPU_UP_CANCELED: > > + case CPU_UP_CANCELED_FROZEN: > > + case CPU_DOWN_FAILED: > > + case CPU_DOWN_FAILED_FROZEN: > > + case CPU_ONLINE: > > + case CPU_ONLINE_FROZEN: > > + case CPU_DEAD: > > + case CPU_DEAD_FROZEN: > > + common_cpu_mem_hotplug_unplug(1); > > > > it should just say > > > > + switch (phase) { > > + case CPU_ONLINE: > > + case CPU_ONLINE_FROZEN: > > + case CPU_DEAD: > > + case CPU_DEAD_FROZEN: > > + common_cpu_mem_hotplug_unplug(1); > > > > because it only makes sense to rebuild the scheduler domains when the > > thing SUCCEEDS. > > > > See? By having a sane design, the code is not just more robust and > > easy to follow, you can also simplify it and make it more logical. > > Yes, I agree. And I did _not_ say that the current design is sane. My > impression about changes acceptable during a late release cycle was > utterly CRAPPY (indeed, it's always better to immediately fix a > problem the right way, not just add another patch and pray it doesn't > break somewhere else). mind sending Linus's patch as a completed patchset against tip/master (or tip/sched/devel) so that we can do it in early v2.6.27? i still think your cpusets.c fix is what we should do for v2.6.26, given that there's agreement about how to fix it for real and thus in terms of regression/bug risk your patch is lower-impact and CPU hotplug has been broken for such a long time. But we should follow it up with Linus's patch immediately afterwards in v2.6.27. Hm? 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists