linux-kernel - Re: [RFC 4/4] io_uring: implement futex wait

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]

Date:   Mon, 7 Jun 2021 12:31:48 +0100
From:   Pavel Begunkov <asml.silence@...il.com>
To:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Andres Freund <andres@...razel.de>
Cc:     Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>, io-uring@...r.kernel.org,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Darren Hart <dvhart@...radead.org>,
        Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC 4/4] io_uring: implement futex wait

On 6/5/21 1:43 AM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> Andres,
> 
> On Thu, Jun 03 2021 at 12:03, Andres Freund wrote:
>> On 2021-06-01 23:53:00 +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>>> You surely made your point that this is well thought out.
>>
>> Really impressed with your effort to generously interpret the first
>> version of a proof of concept patch that explicitly was aimed at getting
>> feedback on the basic design and the different use cases.
> 
> feedback on what?
> 
> There is absolutely no description of design and obviously there is no
> use case either. So what do you expect me to be generous about?

That's a complete fallacy, the very RFC is about clarifying a
use case that I was hinted about, not mentioning those I described
you in a reply. Obviously

-- 
Pavel Begunkov