linux-kernel - Re: [tip:irq/core] x86: Sanitize apb timer interrupt handling

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 12 Oct 2010 23:28:19 +0200 (CEST)
From:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To:	Jacob Pan <jacob.jun.pan@...ux.intel.com>
cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mingo@...hat.com, hpa@...or.com,
	mingo@...e.hu, linux-tip-commits@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [tip:irq/core] x86: Sanitize apb timer interrupt handling

On Tue, 12 Oct 2010, Jacob Pan wrote:

> 
> >x86: Sanitize apb timer interrupt handling
> >
> >Disable the interrupt in CPU_DEAD where it belongs.
> My main concern is the performance cost. The power management code for
> Moorestown system make use of the cpu hotplug code (disable_nonboot_cpus)
> but much more frequently. The system low power states are call S0 idle
> state (s0ix).
> 
> Leaving the irq enabled at the chip and desc level between S0ix states
> might give some performance benefit. That was my original thought.
> Will it cause problems?

Errm. I merily moved it to the place where it should be. You do the
disable/enable dance already today.

Thanks,

	tglx
--
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/