linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 17/25] hrtimer: Implementation of softirq hrtimer handling

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: <20170926124058.vrzrcn776qqi2dqw@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date:   Tue, 26 Sep 2017 14:40:58 +0200
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:     Anna-Maria Gleixner <anna-maria@...utronix.de>
Cc:     LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@....org>, keescook@...omium.org,
        John Stultz <john.stultz@...aro.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 17/25] hrtimer: Implementation of softirq hrtimer handling

On Thu, Aug 31, 2017 at 12:23:42PM -0000, Anna-Maria Gleixner wrote:
> @@ -184,6 +188,7 @@ struct hrtimer_cpu_base {
>  	unsigned int			clock_was_set_seq;
>  	bool				migration_enabled;
>  	bool				nohz_active;
> +	bool				softirq_activated;
>  	unsigned int			hres_active	: 1,
>  					in_hrtirq	: 1,
>  					hang_detected	: 1;

Why do we have bools and a bitfield? Should that not all be part of the
bitfield?