linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 1/8] smp: Run functions concurrently in smp_call_function_many

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: <83371B79-02DE-4183-BDD7-E5DDAC8EAA83@vmware.com>
Date:   Tue, 16 Feb 2021 19:04:12 +0000
From:   Nadav Amit <namit@...are.com>
To:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
CC:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
        Rik van Riel <riel@...riel.com>,
        Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 1/8] smp: Run functions concurrently in
 smp_call_function_many_cond()

> On Feb 16, 2021, at 10:59 AM, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
> 
> On Tue, Feb 16, 2021 at 06:53:09PM +0000, Nadav Amit wrote:
>>> On Feb 16, 2021, at 8:32 AM, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
> 
>>> I'm not sure I can explain it yet. It did get me looking at
>>> on_each_cpu() and it appears that wants to be converted too, something
>>> like the below perhaps.
>> 
>> Looks like a good cleanup, but I cannot say I understand the problem and how
>> it would solve it. Err...
> 
> Yeah, me neither. Bit of a mystery so far.

I’ll try to see whether I can figure out about it. Perhaps there is
somewhere an assumption of ordering between the local and remote function
invocations.

Regardless, would you want me to have on_each_cpu() as inline or to keep it
in smp.c?