linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/4] cpu_stop: implement stop

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:	Tue, 04 May 2010 08:55:21 +0200
From:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
CC:	mingo@...e.hu, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org,
	oleg@...hat.com, rusty@...tcorp.com.au, sivanich@....com,
	heiko.carstens@...ibm.com, dipankar@...ibm.com,
	josh@...edesktop.org, paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, arjan@...ux.intel.com,
	torvalds@...ux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] cpu_stop: implement stop_cpu[s]()

Hello, again.

On 05/04/2010 08:40 AM, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Oh, I had code piece which wanted to discern between -ENOENT from
> non-excution and -ENOENT return from the work function which seems
> gone now.  I'll check things again and drop ->executed if everything
> looks okay.

Eh... now I remember.  If we start with ->ret = 0, stop_cpus() can't
return -ENOENT when none of the specified cpus executed without
tracking execution status (so the current code).  If we start with
->ret = -ENOENT, we can't tell whether all cpus executed successfully
or none has executed unless we BUG_ON() -ENOENT return from work
functions and let 0 return override -ENOENT.

Thanks.

-- 
tejun
--
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/