linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] x86, acpi: Make acpi_processor_ffh_cstate_probe() use a work item instead of work_on

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20120917213738.GM18677@google.com>
Date:	Mon, 17 Sep 2012 14:37:38 -0700
From:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To:	Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Cc:	x86@...nel.org, linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86, acpi: Make acpi_processor_ffh_cstate_probe() use
 a work item instead of work_on_cpu()

On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 05:26:43PM -0700, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Workqueue is guaranteed to be available on the target CPU by the time
> acpi_processor_ffh_cstate_probe() is invoked for it.  There's no
> reason to use costly work_on_cpu() which involves creating and tearing
> down a full kthread on each invocation to execute the probing function
> on the target CPU.  Use a work item instead.
> 
> Tested and works as expected.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>

Please forget about this patch (doesn't seem like it has been applied
yet).  Planning on reimplementing work_on_cpu() using system_wq
instead.

Thanks.

-- 
tejun
--
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/