linux-kernel - Re: um: this_cpu_cmpxchg16b

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:	Tue, 12 Apr 2011 22:22:47 +0300
From:	Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org>
To:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Cc:	Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>,
	Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	user-mode-linux-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net, hpa@...or.com
Subject: Re: um: this_cpu_cmpxchg16b_emu

On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 08:41:11PM +0200, Richard Weinberger wrote:
>> Am Dienstag 12 April 2011, 20:10:37 schrieb Christoph Lameter:
>> > On Tue, 12 Apr 2011, Richard Weinberger wrote:
>> > > This patch implements this_cpu_cmpxchg16b_emu() for UML.
>> >
>> > Is this really necessary? Just undefine CONFIG_CMPXCHG_LOCAL for UML and
>> > the asm code will not be used.
>>
>> UML includes arch/x86/Kconfig.cpu which defines CONFIG_CMPXCHG_LOCAL automatically.
>> Just disabling CONFIG_CMPXCHG_LOCAL for UML is IMHO not very nice.
>> When chpxchg is available also UML should use it...

On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 10:20 PM, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org> wrote:
> Ugh... I'd really like to avoid things like this for UML.  Is there
> any SLUB performance sensitive workload running on UML?  I've never
> seen any UML in production environment.  Wouldn't it be better to keep
> things simple?

Yes, it would be. :-)
--
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/