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  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:	Mon, 20 Oct 2014 12:47:16 -0400
From:	Steven Rostedt <>
To:	Paul Gortmaker <>
Cc:	Peter Zijlstra <>,
	<>, <>,
	Thomas Gleixner <>,
	Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <>,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/7] wait.[ch]: Introduce the simple waitqueue (swait)

On Mon, 20 Oct 2014 12:05:42 -0400
Paul Gortmaker <> wrote:
> > No. You move the items off the main list head and add it to the local
> > list and they never go back. Just start processing that local list.
> > Anything added to the main list after that will not get woken up by
> > that current wake_all call. It will need to be woken by another wake_up.
> OK.  But we may not run all of the wakeups, because of:
> +                       if (++woken == nr_exclusive)
> +                               break;
> > 
> > > 
> > > What would need to be done as an unwind at the end of processing the
> > > local list head before it disappears from existence?  Anything?
> > 
> > Not sure what you mean here.
> Per above -- can't there be "orphaned" entries that only exist on the
> local list head that didn't get processed?  What happens to those?

Why not just take off nr_exclusive tasks off the main list and add
those to the local list, and then wake up all on the local list?

-- Steve
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists