linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH bisected regression] sched: rebuild sched domains at suspend/resume

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: <CA+55aFxPiW=T8iNy=Fb_fuO2DYV9+sQL-mr8=Uc7cWymTyVt6A@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Tue, 6 Mar 2012 16:54:20 -0800
From:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
Cc:	Konstantin Khlebnikov <khlebnikov@...nvz.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	"Srivatsa S. Bhat" <srivatsa.bhat@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bisected regression] sched: rebuild sched domains at suspend/resume

On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 1:02 PM, Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl> wrote:
>
> This changelog also completely fails to explain what the problem was and
> how this patch sorts it without re-introducing the problems 8f2f748b0656
> was supposed to fix.
>
> I'd rather revert the 'fix' and think about this more (its been broken
> pretty much forever anyway) than tinker on top like this.

Ok, guys, I don't care whether it's the revert or the addition of
rebuild_sched_domains(), but I'd like for somebody to make that
decision and test the end result.

I do agree that reverting is probably safer at this point, but can we
get agreement on this?

               Linus
--
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/