linux-kernel - Re: [PATCHSET] timer: clean up initializers and implement irqsafe timers

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: <1345028307.31459.80.camel@twins>
Date:	Wed, 15 Aug 2012 12:58:27 +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>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	mingo@...hat.com, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Subject: Re: [PATCHSET] timer: clean up initializers and implement irqsafe
 timers

On Tue, 2012-08-14 at 17:18 -0700, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Let's see if we can agree on the latter point first.  Do you agree
> that it wouldn't be a good idea to implement relatively complex timer
> subsystem inside workqueue? 

RB-trees are fairly trivial to use, but can we please get back to why
people want to do del/mod delayed work from IRQ context?

I can get the queueing part, but why do they need to cancel and or
modify stuff?

Trying to come up with a solution to a problem you don't understand is
kinda difficult.
--
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/