linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 19/21] tracing: Account for preempt off in preempt

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 23 Sep 2011 16:07:49 +0200
From:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 19/21] tracing: Account for preempt off in
 preempt_schedule()

On Fri, 2011-09-23 at 16:00 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> 
> Wouldn't it be much more sensible to mark all that preempt/irq fiddling
> in the idle path with _notrace instead? And stick a comment near.
> 
> Having two things to do the same thing just doesn't make sense.

That is, it seems to me avoiding the idle path is seen as a non-preempt
region is cleaner than (mostly) fixing it up.
--
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/