linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 03/10] sched/topology: Propagate SD_ASYM

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: <20200806164628.GA2137558@gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 6 Aug 2020 18:46:28 +0200
From:   Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To:     Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@....com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Quentin Perret <qperret@...gle.com>,
        peterz@...radead.org, vincent.guittot@...aro.org,
        dietmar.eggemann@....com, morten.rasmussen@....com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 03/10] sched/topology: Propagate SD_ASYM_CPUCAPACITY
 upwards


* Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@....com> wrote:

> This does sound sensible; I can shuffle this around for v5.

Thanks!

> FWIW the reason I had this very patch before the instrumentation is that
> IMO it really wants to be propagated and could thus directly be tagged with
> SDF_SHARED_PARENT when the instrumentation hits. It's a minor thing, but
> having it after the instrumentation means that I'll first have to tag it
> without any hierarchical metaflag, and then tag it with SDF_SHARED_PARENT
> in the propagation fix.
> 
> If that sounds fine by you, I'll do just that.

Sounds good to me!

	Ingo