linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 00/41] percpu: Consistent per cpu operations V1

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: <20131204084020.GB31737@gmail.com>
Date:	Wed, 4 Dec 2013 09:40:20 +0100
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To:	Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>
Cc:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, akpm@...uxfoundation.org,
	rostedt@...dmis.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/41] percpu: Consistent per cpu operations V1


* Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com> wrote:

> The kernel has never been audited to ensure that this_cpu operations 
> are consistently used throughout the kernel. The code generated in 
> many places can be improved through the use of this_cpu operations 
> (which uses a segment register for relocation of per cpu offsets 
> instead of performing address calculations).

Your series lacks the this_cpu ops preempt debugging patches that you 
worked on before, what happened to them?

Those debug facilities caught kernel real bugs and they are thus 
essential before any percpu extension can be done.

Thanks,

	Ingo
--
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/