linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH -v10 0/4] Lock-less list

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: <1295522876.28776.158.camel@laptop>
Date:	Thu, 20 Jan 2011 12:27:56 +0100
From:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:	huang ying <huang.ying.caritas@...il.com>
Cc:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Huang Ying <ying.huang@...el.com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Chris Mason <chris.mason@...cle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -v10 0/4] Lock-less list

On Thu, 2011-01-20 at 19:18 +0800, huang ying wrote:
> >
> > In fact, I have a patch ready and waiting to revert the whole irq_work
> > stuff, that too seems to be a superfluous generalization.
> 
> What do you plan to replace irq_work?  I plan to use it in APEI NMI
> handler and MCE handler. 

But will all that stuff be accepted? Please stop sending infrastructure
bits and focus on your larger RAS picture, once you have consensus on
that from all parties involved, then, and only then, does it make sense
to submit everything, including infrastructure.

As it stands now you're simply submitting infrastructure without any
users, and we all know the RAS thing isn't settled, so those users might
never come..


--
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/