| 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
| ||
|
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2014 11:02:27 -0700 From: Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net> To: paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com Cc: peterz@...radead.org, mingo@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 7/9] locktorture: Add infrastructure for torturing read locks On Fri, 2014-09-12 at 09:06 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 09:40:41PM -0700, Davidlohr Bueso wrote: > > In addition, introduce a new nreaders_stress module parameter. The > > default number of readers will be the same number of writers threads. > > Writer threads are interleaved with readers. Documentation is updated, > > respectively. > > Nice!!! > > Conditional fairness checks in the future? (As in verifying that if > the rwlock in question claims some degree of fairness, trying to break > that guarantee, and contrariwise, if the lock is unfair, making sure > to avoid starvation during the test?) Yep, there are all sorts of interesting things we can measure in rw runs. In this set I'm only trying to establish a minimum infrastructure. Future work will be pretty trivial (at least code wise) to implement once this sort of thing is in. > And one nit below. [...] > C initialization does this already, no need to add the NULL initializers. Sure, I always tend to be explicit when initializing. I guess you won't like the context initialization in patch 9/9. Thanks, Davidlohr -- 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists