linux-kernel - Re: [RFC 1/3] Unified NMI delayed call mechanism

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: <AANLkTilwPmIdrueWHLqK5VJpdYSOuSXhBh6gQ209NZAY@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Sat, 19 Jun 2010 09:51:01 +0800
From:	huang ying <huang.ying.caritas@...il.com>
To:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Hidetoshi Seto <seto.hidetoshi@...fujitsu.com>,
	Huang Ying <ying.huang@...el.com>,
	"Fr??d??ric Weisbecker" <fweisbec@...il.com>,
	Don Zickus <dzickus@...hat.com>,
	"H.PeterA" <"nvin hpa"@zytor.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC 1/3] Unified NMI delayed call mechanism

On Fri, Jun 18, 2010 at 11:31 PM, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
> On Fri, 2010-06-18 at 23:16 +0800, huang ying wrote:
>>
>> soft_irq is a delayed mechanism for IRQ,
>
> No its not.

Why? What do you think soft_irq is for?

>>  a self interrupt can be a
>> delayed mechanism for NMI. If we can make soft_irq NMI-safe,
>
> No you can't.
>
>> we can
>> use soft_irq as a backup of self interrupt (for systems without APIC
>> and maybe for other architectures).
>
> Whatever would you want to do that for.

Best Regards,
Huang Ying
--
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/