linux-kernel - Re: [RFC v13][PATCH 00/14] Kernel based checkpoint/restart

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: <20090214230802.GE20477@elte.hu>
Date:	Sun, 15 Feb 2009 00:08:02 +0100
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	Dave Hansen <dave@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>, orenl@...columbia.edu,
	linux-api@...r.kernel.org, containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
	torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, viro@...iv.linux.org.uk,
	hpa@...or.com, tglx@...utronix.de
Subject: Re: [RFC v13][PATCH 00/14] Kernel based checkpoint/restart


* Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:

> Similar to the way in which perfectly correct and normal kernel
> sometimes has to be changed because it unexpectedly upsets the -rt
> patch.

Actually, regarding -rt, we try to keep that in two buckets:

 1) Normal kernel code works but is unclean or structured less
    than ideal. In this case we restructure the mainline code,
    but that change stands on its own four legs, without any
    -rt considerations.

 2) Normal kernel code that is clean - i.e. a change that only
    matters to -rt. In this case we dont touch the mainline code,
    nor do we bother mainline.

Do you know any specific example that falls outside of those categories?

	Ingo
--
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/