linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 01/12] sched: Simplify INIT_PREEMPT

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: <20151001132546.GF3432@lerouge>
Date:	Thu, 1 Oct 2015 15:25:46 +0200
From:	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
To:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:	mingo@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, oleg@...hat.com,
	umgwanakikbuti@...il.com, tglx@...utronix.de, rostedt@...dmis.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 01/12] sched: Simplify INIT_PREEMPT_COUNT

On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 09:10:36AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> As per commit d86ee4809d03 ("sched: optimize cond_resched()") we need
> PREEMPT_ACTIVE to avoid cond_resched() from working before the
> scheduler is setup.
> 
> However, keeping preemption disabled should do the same thing already,
> making the PREEMPT_ACTIVE part entirely redundant.
> 
> The only complication is !PREEMPT_COUNT kernels, where
> PREEMPT_DISABLED ends up being 0. Instead we use an unconditional
> PREEMPT_OFFSET to set preempt_count() even on !PREEMPT_COUNT kernels.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@...radead.org>

Reviewed-by: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>

--
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/