linux-kernel - Re: cpu_active vs pcrypt & padata

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: <20120316104409.GP15404@secunet.com>
Date:	Fri, 16 Mar 2012 11:44:09 +0100
From:	Steffen Klassert <steffen.klassert@...unet.com>
To:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: cpu_active vs pcrypt & padata

Hi.

On Fri, Mar 16, 2012 at 11:13:08AM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> Hi Steffen,
> 
> I found cpu_active usage in crypto/pcrypt.c and was wondering what
> that's doing there. I would really like to contain that thing to as
> narrow a piece of kernel as I possible can (sched/cpuset/hotplug) but it
> appears to be spreading.

pcrypt uses cpu_active to tell padata which cpuset it whishes
to use for parallelization. I could try to push the cpumask
handling down to padata if you want to limit this to the core
kernel.

> 
> Also, wth is all this kernel/padata.c stuff? There's next to no useful
> comment in there and the only consumer seems to be pcrypt, does that
> really need to be in kernel/ ?

The padata code is generic and not limited to crypto, you can find
a documentation at Documentation/padata.txt.

--
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/