linux-kernel - Re: [patch 00/18] SMP: Boot and CPU hotplug refactoring

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:	Fri, 20 Apr 2012 17:49:24 +0200
From:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Cc:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
	Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
	"Srivatsa S. Bhat" <srivatsa.bhat@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [patch 00/18] SMP: Boot and CPU hotplug refactoring - Part 1

On Fri, 2012-04-20 at 08:42 -0700, Tejun Heo wrote:
> I'm still leaning towards restricting kthreadd and any PF_THREAD_BOUND
> threads in the root cgroup.  

I'd definitely agree with restricting those. 

> I'm not sure about !BOUND kthreads tho.
> It doesn't make sense for the most part but there are cases
> (e.g. crypto kthreads) which might make some sense.
> 
Agreed as well. There are a few nasty corner cases with unbound
workqueues vs allowing cgroups (as how to place new worker threads
correctly etc..). Sorting that is a 'fun' next problem.

Could we merge the kthreadd/PF_THREAD_BOUND restriction? You've got my
ACK and I'm fairly sure tglx will ACK it as well.

--
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/