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]
Message-ID: <20160621203958.GU25646@wotan.suse.de>
Date:	Tue, 21 Jun 2016 22:39:58 +0200
From:	"Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@...nel.org>
To:	Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...6.fr>
Cc:	"Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@...nel.org>, Gilles.Muller@...6.fr,
	nicolas.palix@...g.fr, mmarek@...e.com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, markivx@...eaurora.org,
	stephen.boyd@...aro.org, zohar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
	broonie@...nel.org, ming.lei@...onical.com, tiwai@...e.de,
	johannes@...solutions.net, chunkeey@...glemail.com,
	hauke@...ke-m.de, jwboyer@...oraproject.org,
	dmitry.torokhov@...il.com, dwmw2@...radead.org, jslaby@...e.com,
	torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, deepa.kernel@...il.com,
	cocci@...teme.lip6.fr
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/8] coccicheck: enable parmap support

On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 10:17:38PM +0200, Julia Lawall wrote:
> 
> 
> On Tue, 21 Jun 2016, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> 
> > Coccinelle has had parmap support since 1.0.2, this means
> > it supports --jobs, enabling built-in multithreaded functionality,
> > instead of needing one to script it out. Just look for --jobs
> > in the help output to determine if this is supported.
> > 
> > Also enable the load balancing to be dynamic, so that if a
> > thread finishes early we keep feeding it.
> > 
> > Note: now that we have all things handled for us, redirect stderr to
> > stdout as well to capture any possible errors or warnings issued by
> > coccinelle.
> > 
> > If --jobs is not supported we fallback to the old mechanism.
> > This also now accepts DEBUG_FILE= to specify where you want
> > stderr to be redirected to, by default we redirect stderr to
> > /dev/null.
> 
> Why do you want to do something different for standard error in the parmap 
> and nonparmap case?

We should just deprecate non-parmap later.

  Luis

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ