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]

Date:	Mon, 1 Sep 2008 15:56:37 -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 Tue, 2 Sep 2008, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > 
> > Umm. Which one. The 32-bit or the 64-bit?
> 
> The 32 bit version.

So then the PIT isn't going to work on that machine. Do you have HPET?

Because if so, the most obvious choice would be to say:

 - on old machines, the PIT is likely more reliable than PM_TIMER

 - on new machines, the HPET is likely more reliable than PIT

and there's actually a fairly obvious place to distinguish between old and 
new: if ti has a HPET, consider it a new one.

But that just means that there's never any reason to use PM_TIMER anyway, 
and the proper patch would probably be to just ignore it. No?

		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/