| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <BANLkTimsw1N=0QkEsySBE58GJx7g12XQpQ@mail.gmail.com> 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists