linux-kernel - Re: [RFC][PATCH 4/5] printk: Have wake_up_klogd() use __this_cpu

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: <1316530554.13664.35.camel@twins>
Date:	Tue, 20 Sep 2011 16:55:53 +0200
From:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:	Christoph Lameter <cl@...two.org>
Cc:	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 4/5] printk: Have wake_up_klogd() use
 __this_cpu_write()

On Tue, 2011-09-20 at 09:54 -0500, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> On Mon, 19 Sep 2011, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> 
> > Note, just because something is always in a location that preemption is
> > disabled, does not mean it should use the __this_cpu*() variants.
> 
> Why not? If preemption is disabled then the process cannot be migrated to
> another processor. And thus doing the address calculations and operations
> on variables step by step is okay.
> 
> > Because if things change, it may become a problem later on.
> 
> What things may change? Someone calls the function with preemption
> enabled? 

Yes, also, for !x86 you get a redundant preempt_disable/enable pair.


--
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/