linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH -v2] 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]

Message-Id: <200901301225.48979.rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Date:	Fri, 30 Jan 2009 12:25:48 +1030
From:	Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>
To:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, npiggin@...e.de,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>,
	jens.axboe@...cle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH -v2] use per cpu data for single cpu ipi calls

On Friday 30 January 2009 04:38:23 Linus Torvalds wrote:
> 
> On Thu, 29 Jan 2009, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > 
> > Actually, we are locking against the destination CPU.
> 
> Oh.
> 
> THAT'S JUST INCOMPETENT.
> 
> What the *fuck* is the point of having per-CPU data, and then using it for 
> the wrong CPU?

Maybe we made it too easy to declare and use per-cpu data?

Could we use an nr_cpu_ids array?  Yes, it needs alloc at boot somewhere, but
it avoids collateral damage to other percpu data (and please don't suggest DEFINE_PER_CPU_SHARED_ALIGNED: that's just antisocial).

Thanks,
Rusty.
--
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/