linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/1] x86_64: add config options to optimize for newer AMD processors

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]

Date:	Sun, 29 Sep 2013 17:23:37 -0400
From:	Austin S Hemmelgarn <ahferroin7@...il.com>
To:	Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
CC:	Linux-Kernel mailing list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux Torvalds <torvalds@...l.org>, Alan Cox <alan@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] x86_64: add config options to optimize for newer
 AMD processors

On 09/29/2013 04:50 PM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 29, 2013 at 04:41:02PM -0400, Austin S Hemmelgarn
> wrote:
>> While I understand that you want decisive proof that it provides
>> an improvement, does it specifically matter if the option is
>> unused by most people and doesn't result in a negative
>> performance hit when used?
> 
> Just having the option for no good reason at all is a no-no.

I'm not saying that should just be included without substantiation, I
simply mean that the reason to include it (as far as I am concerned)
is that it doesn't break anything and provides something useful that
isn't in the kernel already.

Despite this I am still happy to benchmark it to provide some more
concrete proof.
--
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/