linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RFC 01/16] prcu: Add PRCU implementation

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]

Date:   Wed, 24 Jan 2018 12:26:29 +0100
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:     lianglihao@...wei.com
Cc:     paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, guohanjun@...wei.com,
        heng.z@...wei.com, hb.chen@...wei.com, lihao.liang@...il.com,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 01/16] prcu: Add PRCU implementation

On Tue, Jan 23, 2018 at 03:59:26PM +0800, lianglihao@...wei.com wrote:
> From: Heng Zhang <heng.z@...wei.com>
> 
> This RCU implementation (PRCU) is based on a fast consensus protocol
> published in the following paper:
> 
> Fast Consensus Using Bounded Staleness for Scalable Read-mostly Synchronization.
> Haibo Chen, Heng Zhang, Ran Liu, Binyu Zang, and Haibing Guan.
> IEEE Transactions on Parallel and Distributed Systems (TPDS), 2016.
> https://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=3024114.3024143

That's an utterly useless changelog for something like a new RCU
implementation.

You fail to describe why you're proposing a new RCU implementation; what
problems does it fix?, how is it better?

All you provide is a paywalled link to some paper that we can't read.

Please write a real changelog that describes things properly and
provide, if at all possible, a readily accessible link to your paper.