linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/14] v2 multi-die/package topology support

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: <b0923e09-aa99-81a3-fc33-4694e39b96e6@inria.fr>
Date:   Fri, 12 Apr 2019 22:40:49 +0200
From:   Brice Goglin <Brice.Goglin@...ia.fr>
To:     Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc:     Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@....com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/14] v2 multi-die/package topology support

Le 12/04/2019 à 21:52, Len Brown a écrit :
>>>> I think I prefer 's/threads/cpus/g' on that. Threads makes me think SMT,
>>>> and I don't think there's any guarantee the part in question will have
>>>> SMT on.
>>> I think 'threads' is a bit confusing as well. We seem to be using 'cpu'
>>> everywhere for something we can schedule tasks on, including the sysfs
>>> /sys/devices/system/cpu/ subdirs for each SMT thread on SMT systems.
> I agree with Peter and Morten.
> "cpu" is more clear and consistent than "thread" here.
> I'll spin the series with that string changed.


Agreed, I should have used that suffix from the beginning.

Brice