linux-kernel - Re: [RFC][PATCH] irq

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:	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/