linux-kernel - Re: [bisected] pre-3.16 regression on open() scalability

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: <alpine.DEB.2.11.1406180929020.28208@gentwo.org>
Date:	Wed, 18 Jun 2014 09:29:17 -0500 (CDT)
From:	Christoph Lameter <cl@...two.org>
To:	Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>
cc:	Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>, paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org>,
	"Chen, Tim C" <tim.c.chen@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [bisected] pre-3.16 regression on open() scalability

On Tue, 17 Jun 2014, Andi Kleen wrote:

> I still think it's totally the wrong place. cond_resched() is in so
> many fast paths (every lock, every allocation). It just doesn't
> make sense to add non essential things like this to it.
>
> I would be rather to just revert the original patch.

I fully agree.

--
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/