linux-kernel - Re: [patch 2/3] tick/sched: Remove bogus boot "safety" check

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: <20201211224101.GD595642@lothringen>
Date:   Fri, 11 Dec 2020 23:41:01 +0100
From:   Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>
To:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc:     LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Marco Elver <elver@...gle.com>,
        kasan-dev <kasan-dev@...glegroups.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
        Naresh Kamboju <naresh.kamboju@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [patch 2/3] tick/sched: Remove bogus boot "safety" check

On Sun, Dec 06, 2020 at 10:12:55PM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> can_stop_idle_tick() checks whether the do_timer() duty has been taken over
> by a CPU on boot. That's silly because the boot CPU always takes over with
> the initial clockevent device.
> 
> But even if no CPU would have installed a clockevent and taken over the
> duty then the question whether the tick on the current CPU can be stopped
> or not is moot. In that case the current CPU would have no clockevent
> either, so there would be nothing to keep ticking.
> 
> Remove it.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>

Acked-by: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>

Thanks!