linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] Revert "x86: Disable IST stacks for debug/int 3/stack fault for PREEMPT

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: <1388898334.5342.39.camel@marge.simpson.net>
Date:	Sun, 05 Jan 2014 06:05:34 +0100
From:	Mike Galbraith <bitbucket@...ine.de>
To:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
Cc:	Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>,
	Ben Hutchings <ben@...adent.org.uk>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...tedt.homelinux.com>,
	Brian Silverman <bsilver16384@...il.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-rt-users@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Revert "x86: Disable IST stacks for debug/int 3/stack
 fault for PREEMPT_RT"

On Sun, 2014-01-05 at 05:45 +0100, Mike Galbraith wrote:

> Or perhaps tell sleeping locks to spin in annoying spots?  I converted
> rt spinlocks globally to preemptible spinning locks (wasn't pretty, but
> worked), so seems that could work.

Bah.  Nope, if lock owner is on your cpu, you have to yield.

--
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/