linux-kernel - Re: [RFC] [rt-tests] change to cyclictest behavior

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: <4B450D91.7060403@osadl.org>
Date:	Wed, 06 Jan 2010 23:24:17 +0100
From:	Carsten Emde <Carsten.Emde@...dl.org>
To:	Clark Williams <williams@...hat.com>
CC:	John Kacur <jkacur@...hat.com>,
	RT <linux-rt-users@...r.kernel.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] [rt-tests] change to cyclictest behavior

Clark,

>> [..]
>> Here is my proposal:
>> Do not change the meaning of existing options. Introduce a new option
>> that is mutual exclusive with the -a, the -t and the -d option. This new
>> option does the same as -a and -t and -d0 and sets the same priority to
>> all threads. How about that?
> Ugh, I truly *hate* adding options. Do you know that cyclictest is
> halfway to having as many options as 'ls'?
Well, yes, we have the choice between two bad things, breaking
compatibility or adding another option. I prefer the latter.
> [..]
> How about if we create the -S/--smp option that takes no arguments and
> causes -a, -t and -d to be ignored (with a warning). This option would
> create one thread per cpu, each thread pinned to it's corresponding
> cpu, all with the same sampling interval (i.e. -d0) and the same
> priority?
Sounds good to me.

May I ask you to also include the -n option which is almost always
needed? This would then give:

-S      --smp              Standard SMP testing (equals -a -t -n -d0),
                           same priority on all threads.

	Carsten.
--
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/