linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PULL] printk: Support for full dynticks mode

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: <1360034978.27007.12.camel@gandalf.local.home>
Date:	Mon, 04 Feb 2013 22:29:38 -0500
From:	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To:	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
Cc:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@...driver.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] printk: Support for full dynticks mode

On Mon, 2013-02-04 at 22:24 -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote:

> The reason to avoid the wake up of klogd() is that it also grabs the
> wait queue spinlock every time it's called. up() is fast when there's no
> waiters, but wake_up_interruptible() is not so fast.

I take that back. Seems up() takes the sem->lock every time too :-p

But it's just a matter of slowing things down. I don't see it causing
any deadlocks.

-- Steve


--
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/