linux-kernel - Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/3] locking/qspinlock: Improve determinism for x86

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: <20180926153825.lqkus5b6m7bscot2@linutronix.de>
Date:   Wed, 26 Sep 2018 17:38:26 +0200
From:   Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>
To:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, will.deacon@....com,
        mingo@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, longman@...hat.com,
        andrea.parri@...rulasolutions.com
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/3] locking/qspinlock: Improve determinism for x86

On 2018-09-26 17:08:42 [+0200], Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> Remember that 4.14 took almost 8 hours to fail, so I'd recommend not to
> cheer too much. Let's see what it tells us in 48 hours.

I don't cheer. I merely point out that shuffling the whole atomic code
around did not make a change while applying the three patches did.
The v4.4 kernel did survive for 5 days. Here we might start looking for
the cheer outfit.

> Thanks,
> 
> 	tglx
Sebastian