linux-kernel - Re: [RFC GIT PULL] scheduler fix for autogroups

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: <CA+55aFxcoLuVcrxmRQ8E2d6hXQZLrg8_rzmdSL2Qn3w8VthfSg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Sun, 2 Dec 2012 11:36:06 -0800
From:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Cc:	Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC GIT PULL] scheduler fix for autogroups

On Sun, Dec 2, 2012 at 11:27 AM, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> * Mike Galbraith <efault@....de> wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 2012-12-01 at 22:44 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>>
>> > Should we use some other file for that - or no file at all and
>> > just emit a bootup printk for kernel hackers with a short
>> > attention span?
>>
>> Or, whack the file and don't bother with a printk either.  If
>> it's in your config, and your command line doesn't contain
>> noautogroup, it's on, so the info is already present (until
>> buffer gets full).  That makes for even fewer lines dedicated
>> to dinky sideline feature.
>>
>> Or (as previously mentioned) just depreciate (or rip out) the
>> whole thing since systemd is propagating everywhere anyway,
>> and offers the same functionality.
>>
>> For 3.7, a revert of 800d4d30c8f2 would prevent the explosion
>> when folks play with the now non-functional on/off switch
>> (task groups are required to _always_ exist, that commit
>> busted the autogroup assumption), so is perhaps a viable
>> quickfix until autogroups fate is decided?
>
> Linus, which one would be your preference? I'm fine with the
> first and third options - #2 that rips it all out looks like
> a sad removal of an otherwise useful feature.

I suspect #3 is the best option right now - just revert 800d4d30c8f2.

Willing to write a changelog with the pointer to the actual oops that
happens due to this issue?

               Linus
--
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/