linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 0/8] scheduler tinification

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

Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.20.1706130825140.29475@knanqh.ubzr>
Date:   Tue, 13 Jun 2017 08:29:31 -0400 (EDT)
From:   Nicolas Pitre <nicolas.pitre@...aro.org>
To:     Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
cc:     Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/8] scheduler tinification

On Tue, 13 Jun 2017, Ingo Molnar wrote:

> > I simply moved some code to different source files and not including 
> > those source files in the final build. That keeps the number of #ifdef's 
> > to a minimum but it makes a big diffstat due to the code movement.
> 
> So I'm fine with most of the code movement - let's try this series without any of 
> the more controversial bits which should make future arguments easier.

You should then be able to merge patches #1 to #5 already (you already 
have #2) as the more controversial ones are at the end.


Nicolas