linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RFCv2 0/8] sched: Enforce order of leaf CFS runqueues (and list cleanup)

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: <4E39B806.6020405@cs.tu-berlin.de>
Date:	Wed, 03 Aug 2011 23:05:10 +0200
From:	Jan Schönherr <schnhrr@...tu-berlin.de>
To:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
CC:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Paul Turner <pjt@...gle.com>,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Dipankar Sarma <dipankar@...ibm.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFCv2 0/8] sched: Enforce order of leaf CFS runqueues
 (and list cleanup)

Hi Peter,

Am 27.07.2011 21:10, schrieb Jan H. Schönherr:
> Patch 1: After inventing __list_link(), I realized, that this
> 	 function already existed, but with a different name.
> 
> 	 This patch just does some renaming. Not really needed,
> 	 but if I use the old naming in patch 2 it's really 
> 	 hard to understand what's actually going on.
> 
> 	 It also helps to increase the readability of the existing
> 	 code, see patches 6-8.
> 
> Patch 2: This introduces new list functions to splice RCU lists
> 	 and handle deleted RCU list entries.
> 
> Patch 3: The actual bugfix.
> 
> Patch 4+5: Follow-ups to patch 1. Some more renaming and use of
> 	   appropriate functions.
> 
> Patch 6: Another follow-up to patch 1, improving the readability of
> 	 the list routines a bit.
> 
> Patch 7+8: Follow-ups to patch 2. Make use of the introduced
>            functionality in the already existing code.


I am wondering, whether v3 should consist basically only of
patches 2 and 3, i. e. the minimal approach, or if you would
take all of them?

If you prefer the minimal version, I would make another patch
set out of the other patches. But as there seems to be no official
maintainer for list related functionality, I would appreciate
some hints who I should put on the TO/CC list.

Regards
Jan
--
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/