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
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2020 19:55:36 +0100 From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de> To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de> Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>, "Paul E . McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>, Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/9] completion: Use simple wait queues Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> writes: > On Fri, Mar 13, 2020 at 10:47 AM Sebastian Andrzej Siewior > <bigeasy@...utronix.de> wrote: > and before you do a conversion, you need to spend a _lot_ of time > thinking about why that is the case. > > And _after_ you do the conversion, you damn well need to explain why > it's safe. Not just state that it's a good idea. > > For example, this patch just randomly changes wait events to the swait > event _exclusive_ waits. With not a single explanation of why that > would be ok. > > I want an explanation for EVERY SINGLE CASE. Because people have done > this kind of conversion before, and it's been buggy garbage before. I > want to see that people actually thought about what the semantic > differences were, and _documented_ that thinking process. My bad. I'll rework the changelog so it contains the proof that the result is semantical and functional equivalent. Thanks, tglx
Powered by blists - more mailing lists