linux-kernel - Re: [RFC] sched: make callers check lock contention for cond_resched

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: <1336060050.22523.23.camel@twins>
Date:	Thu, 03 May 2012 17:47:30 +0200
From:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:	Takuya Yoshikawa <takuya.yoshikawa@...il.com>
Cc:	mingo@...e.hu, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org, avi@...hat.com,
	mtosatti@...hat.com, yoshikawa.takuya@....ntt.co.jp
Subject: Re: [RFC] sched: make callers check lock contention for
 cond_resched_lock()

On Thu, 2012-05-03 at 22:00 +0900, Takuya Yoshikawa wrote:
> But as I could not see why spin_needbreak() was differently
> implemented
> depending on CONFIG_PREEMPT, I wanted to understand the meaning. 

Its been that way since before voluntary preemption was introduced, so
its possible Ingo simply missed that spot and nobody noticed until now.

Ingo, do you have any recollections from back when?
--
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/