linux-kernel - Re: [RFD 4/9] Make total

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]

Date:	Wed, 28 Sep 2011 12:39:02 -0300
From:	Glauber Costa <glommer@...allels.com>
To:	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
CC:	Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@...ibm.com>,
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <paul@...lmenage.org>,
	<lizf@...fujitsu.com>, <daniel.lezcano@...e.fr>,
	<jbottomley@...allels.com>,
	Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [RFD 4/9] Make total_forks per-cgroup

On 09/28/2011 12:37 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Wed, 2011-09-28 at 12:35 -0300, Glauber Costa wrote:
>>
>> So let me get this straight: The proposal here is really to get rid of
>> all cputime_t , not only cputime64_t ?
>
> For now cputime64_t would be sufficient, just wanted to extend the
> argument with Martin to see if we really need the cputime*() trickery at
> all.
>
>
Well, at least the 64-bit part I can do myself in this series, since I 
am already touching it. I'd keep a transition point in which we convert 
ticks to u64 whenever needed, and we can get rid of it later if you 
really ditch cputime_t
--
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/