linux-kernel - Re: [RFC 0/4] Migrate timers away from cpuset on setting cpuset.quiesce

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:	Thu, 24 Apr 2014 15:00:34 +0530
From:	Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
To:	Daniel Sangorrin <daniel.sangorrin@...hiba.co.jp>
Cc:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Frédéric Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
	Li Zefan <lizefan@...wei.com>,
	Lists linaro-kernel <linaro-kernel@...ts.linaro.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Cgroups <cgroups@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC 0/4] Migrate timers away from cpuset on setting cpuset.quiesce

On 24 April 2014 14:54, Daniel Sangorrin <daniel.sangorrin@...hiba.co.jp> wrote:
> Why didn't you just apply the patch on top of your tree so that the
> information included in the git commit (e.g: my name and mail) remains?
>
> This part:
>
> cpuset: quiesce: change irq disable/enable by irq save/restore
>
> The function __migrate_timers can be called under interrupt context
> or thread context depending on the core where the system call was
> executed. In case it executes under interrupt context, it
> seems a bad idea to leave interrupts enabled after migrating the
> timers. In fact, this caused kernel errors on the ARM architecture and
> on the x86_64 architecture with the 3.10 kernel (backported version
> of the cpuset-quiesce patch).
>
> Signed-off-by: Daniel Sangorrin <daniel.sangorrin@...hiba.co.jp>
> Signed-off-by: Yoshitake Kobayashi <yoshitake.kobayashi@...hiba.co.jp>

That's what I told you earlier when I said this:

> I can't keep it as a separate patch and so would be required to merge
> it into my original patch..

And the reason being: "No patch is supposed to break things, otherwise
git bisect wouldn't work smoothly".. And so git bisect would complain
this issue after my patch and so I have to merge the fixes you gave into
the original patch as its not yet merged.
--
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/