linux-kernel - Re: [RFC v0 4/9] smpboot: Use freeze_active() instead CPU_DEAD

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <55EEA114.1010404@monom.org>
Date:	Tue, 8 Sep 2015 10:49:24 +0200
From:	Daniel Wagner <wagi@...om.org>
To:	Daniel Wagner <daniel.wagner@...-carit.de>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Chris Metcalf <cmetcalf@...hip.com>,
	Don Zickus <dzickus@...hat.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Lai Jiangshan <laijs@...fujitsu.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC v0 4/9] smpboot: Use freeze_active() instead CPU_DEAD_FROZEN
 state information

On 09/04/2015 03:34 PM, Daniel Wagner wrote:
> In order to get rid of all CPU_*_FROZEN states we need to convert all
> users first.
> 
> cpu_check_up_prepare() wants to report different errors depending on
> an ongoing suspend or not. freeze_active() reports back if that is the
> case so we don't have to rely on the CPU_DEAD_FROZEN anymore.

Just realized, this is patch doesn't make sense. The FROZEN bits in the
current code have nothing to do with CPU_TASK_FROZEN. Instead it should
use CPU_DEAD_TIMEOUT as explained in patch 01.
--
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/