linux-kernel - Re: [patch 5/7] x86_64: Support for cpu ops

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:	Thu, 6 Nov 2008 10:11:49 -0600 (CST)
From:	Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
cc:	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org, travis@....com,
	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
	Vegard Nossum <vegard.nossum@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [patch 5/7] x86_64: Support for cpu ops

On Thu, 6 Nov 2008, Ingo Molnar wrote:

> But it's not actually utilized on x86. AFAICS you guys never came back
> with working patches for that (tip/x86/percpu is empty currently), and
> now i see something related on lkml on a separate track not Cc:-ed to
> the x86 folks so i thought i'd ask whether more coordination is
> desired here.

We should definitely look into this but my priorities have changed a bit.
32 bit is far more significant for me now.

Could you point me to a post that describes the currently open issues with
x86_64? Mike handled that before.

> So ... what's the merge plan here? I like your fundamental idea, it's
> a nice improvement in a couple of areas and i'd like to help out make
> it happen. Also, the new per-cpu allocator would be nice for the
> sparseirq code.

Right. Its good in many areas.
--
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/