linux-kernel - Re: [PATCHSET wq/for-3.10] workqueue: break up workqueue

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAAmzW4N=t=aB194E-B185x1gqTJqNK4XO_diiaJrhjx+CN-_VA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Wed, 20 Mar 2013 23:01:50 +0900
From:	JoonSoo Kim <js1304@...il.com>
To:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, laijs@...fujitsu.com
Subject: Re: [PATCHSET wq/for-3.10] workqueue: break up workqueue_lock into
 multiple locks

2013/3/19 Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>:
> On Wed, Mar 13, 2013 at 07:57:18PM -0700, Tejun Heo wrote:
>> and available in the following git branch.
>>
>>  git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tj/wq.git review-finer-locking
>
> Applied to wq/for-3.10.

Hello, Tejun.

I know I am late, but, please give me a change to ask a question.

Finer locking for workqueue code is really needed?
Is there a performance issue?
I think that there is too many locks and locking rules,
although the description about these are very nice.

Thanks.

> 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/
--
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/