linux-kernel - Re: Regression in 2.6.27 caused by commit bfc0f59

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.1.10.0809011500460.12958@nehalem.linux-foundation.org>
Date:	Mon, 1 Sep 2008 15:02:18 -0700 (PDT)
From:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
cc:	Larry Finger <Larry.Finger@...inger.net>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>,
	Alok Kataria <akataria@...are.com>,
	Michael Buesch <mb@...sch.de>
Subject: Re: Regression in 2.6.27 caused by commit bfc0f59



On Mon, 1 Sep 2008, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> 
> The CPU calibration of < 2.6.27 is against PIT and does _NOT_ give me a
> pretty good estimation for TSC.

Umm. Which one. The 32-bit or the 64-bit?

I already pointed out that the 64-bit PIT calibration is pure and utter 
GARBAGE. And I pointed out that the 32-bit one is a lot smarter.

> I was pretty happy when Alok beat me to unify the TSC calibration code
> as it solved one of my long standing todo items, which also filled my
> buglist on a regular base.

The problem is that he unified it around the _worse_ code.

			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/