linux-kernel - Re: [cpuops cmpxchg double V2 1/4] Generic support for this_cpu_cmpxchg

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:	Fri, 25 Feb 2011 17:37:40 +0100
From:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To:	Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>
Cc:	Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [cpuops cmpxchg double V2 1/4] Generic support for
 this_cpu_cmpxchg_double

On Fri, Feb 25, 2011 at 10:26:43AM -0600, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> On Fri, 25 Feb 2011, Tejun Heo wrote:
> 
> > > Ping? The current situation is that we're unable to merge a
> > > perfectly good SLUB performance optimization because we can't seem
> > > to agree on the this_cpu_cmpxchg_double() API.
> >
> > I thought cl was preparing new version of the patchset.  Christoph?
> 
> In order to do that I would have to see a way to improve the
> patches. None of the suggestions so far seem to be realizable.

I see.  For some reason, I thought you and hpa agreed on something and
you were writing up the patches.  I'll read the thread again.  Let's
just pick one.  It's not like this is an API which will be used
througout the tree.

Thanks.

-- 
tejun
--
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/