linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] use per cpu data for single cpu ipi calls

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, 29 Jan 2009 09:07:15 -0500 (EST)
From:	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
cc:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, rusty@...tcorp.com.au,
	npiggin@...e.de, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, tglx@...utronix.de,
	arjan@...radead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] use per cpu data for single cpu ipi calls


On Thu, 29 Jan 2009, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, 2009-01-29 at 12:13 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > * Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
> > 
> > > > Can generic_smp_call_function_single_interrupt() ever see 
> > > > CSD_FLAG_ALLOC set now?  If not, that kfree can go away.
> > > 
> > > Like said above, removing that kmalloc will hurt people.
> > 
> > the whole promise of generic-IPI seems to dwindle and we'll get back to 
> > roughly where we started out from.
> 
> I'd not go that far, the per-cpu csd is a nice fallback, but removing
> that kmalloc is just silly.

I'll add the kmalloc back. But the rest should be fine.

-- Steve

--
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/