linux-kernel - Re: [RFC] dynticks: dynticks_idle is only modified locally use this

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 2 Sep 2014 18:22:52 -0500 (CDT)
From:	Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>
To:	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
cc:	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] dynticks: dynticks_idle is only modified locally use
 this_cpu ops

On Tue, 2 Sep 2014, Paul E. McKenney wrote:

> Yep, these two have been on my "when I am feeling insanely gutsy" list
> for quite some time.
>
> But I have to ask...  On x86, is a pair of mfence instructions really
> cheaper than an atomic increment?

Not sure why you would need an mfence instruction?

> > If the first patch I send gets merged then a lot of other this_cpu related
> > optimizations become possible regardless of the ones in the RFC.
>
> Yep, I am queuing that one.

Great.

> But could you please do future patches against the rcu/dev branch of
> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/paulmck/linux-rcu.git?
> I had to hand-apply due to conflicts.  Please see below for my version,
> and please check to make sure that I didn't mess something up in the
> translation.

Looks ok. Will use the correct tree next time.


--
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/