linux-kernel - Re: [GIT pull] scheduler updates for 5.1

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:   Sun, 24 Mar 2019 11:07:02 -0700
From:   Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc:     Linux List Kernel Mailing <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "the arch/x86 maintainers" <x86@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [GIT pull] scheduler updates for 5.1

On Sun, Mar 24, 2019 at 7:14 AM Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de> wrote:
>
> Second more careful attempt for this set of fixes:

What? No. It's the exact same garbage as last time, with no more care
shown anywhere:

  kernel/sched/cpufreq_schedutil.c:346:26: note: in expansion of macro ‘min’
     sg_cpu->iowait_boost = min(sg_cpu->iowait_boost << 1,
SCHED_CAPACITY_SCALE);

I told you *exactly* what the problem was the last time, and it's
*exactly* the same now too.

Hmm. Looking closer, I see that the patch you *claim* to send me has
"min_t()". But the tree I actually got has the same old garbage.

I suspect you didn't update the git repo properly or something.

But since the -tip tree pull requests don't include the git hash
value, I can't even tell what you *meant* to send me. I assume you
also don't get the warning that "git request-pull" would give you
about mismatches..

                Linus