linux-kernel - RE: [ia64] Question on __ARCH_WANT_UNLOCKED

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: <987664A83D2D224EAE907B061CE93D5301EA611910@orsmsx505.amr.corp.intel.com>
Date:	Wed, 24 Aug 2011 13:46:58 -0700
From:	"Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@...el.com>
To:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Ken Chen <kenchen@...gle.com>
CC:	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Ralf Baechle <ralf@...ux-mips.org>,
	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: RE: [ia64] Question on __ARCH_WANT_UNLOCKED_CTXSW

> happen to remember what the perceived benefit of using
> __ARCH_WANT_UNLOCKED_CTXSW was about?

No - digging around the code hasn't rung any bells for me either.

Perhaps just general goodness for not holding a lock for
longer than we need to?  But that would imply some case where
someone else could do something useful by being able to grab
the lock when we drop it. About the only thing I can think
of is that it would allow tasks to be re-balanced just a
teeny bit earlier --- but re-balancing ought to be somewhat
rare, yes?

-Tony