linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 00/25] mm: Preemptibility -v7

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: <m2ipxcsr6v.fsf@linux.intel.com>
Date:	Tue, 25 Jan 2011 11:45:28 -0800
From:	Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>
To:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/25] mm: Preemptibility -v7

Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl> writes:

> This patch-set makes part of the mm a lot more preemptible. It converts
> i_mmap_lock and anon_vma->lock to mutexes and makes mmu_gather fully
> preemptible.
>
> The main motivation was making mm_take_all_locks() preemptible, since it
> appears people are nesting hundreds of spinlocks there.

Just curious: why is mm_take_all_locks() a problem? As far as I can see
it's just used when starting KVM or GRU the first time. Is that a common
situation?

-Andi

-- 
Andi Kleen
Intel Open Source Technology Center

--
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/