linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 00/20] x86/intel_rdt: Start abstraction for a second arch

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:   Thu, 6 Sep 2018 16:03:16 +0200 (CEST)
From:   Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To:     James Morse <james.morse@....com>
cc:     Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@...el.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        x86@...nel.org, Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, H Peter Anvin <hpa@...or.com>,
        Reinette Chatre <reinette.chatre@...el.com>,
        Vikas Shivappa <vikas.shivappa@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 00/20] x86/intel_rdt: Start abstraction for a second
 arch

On Fri, 31 Aug 2018, James Morse wrote:
> You want to see it all at once (great!). I'm not quite ready with all this yet,
> so it will be a while. I assumed 'all at once' would be to much to ask from
> reviewers, hence this attempt to break it into small chunks and post it over a
> longer period of time.

And that's perfectly fine. We know where you are heading to and we also
don't want to have duplication of that stuff. So separating it in place
which also makes further modification follow that separate model is the
right thing to do.

That said, can the RDT people @Intel please look at that separation as a
work of its own? Moving the separated part over to fs/xxx is a nobrainer
after that.

I skimmed through the pile and couldn't spot something which made me
immediately barf, but my capacity is not allowing me to do a thorough
review.

Thanks,

	tglx