| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <1277375409.1875.943.camel@laptop> Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2010 12:30:09 +0200 From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> To: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org> Cc: Huang Ying <ying.huang@...el.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, "H.PeterA" <"nvin hpa"@zytor.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] irq_work On Thu, 2010-06-24 at 12:27 +0200, Andi Kleen wrote: > > True, but I really don't like the softirq thing, and I really don't care > > about !APIC machines, I probably couldn't buy one if I wanted to and its > > not like we have good MCE support for them now, so who cares. > > In theory you can run a machine with good MCE support in non APIC single > CPU mode. It wouldn't make much sense, but you could do it. > > Anyways, I don't think we need a lot of effort to handle this case, > but it would be better to not explicitely break it either. > > That's why the timer fallback in the original code was fine, this > basically never happens and even if there is a 5s delay from tickless > that's fine. Right, in that case I would very much prefer the simpler thing I proposed over all this softirq stuff, we can have the tick process the callbacks for really broken hardware (perf_events doesn't care since without a lapic there's no pmi anyway). -- 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists