linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] x86/cpu: use smp_call_function_many() in arch_freq_prepare

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:   Wed, 30 Mar 2022 10:05:12 -0700
From:   Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
To:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc:     Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
        "Paul E . McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
        "the arch/x86 maintainers" <x86@...nel.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/cpu: use smp_call_function_many() in arch_freq_prepare_all()

On Wed, Mar 30, 2022 at 10:02 AM Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Mar 30 2022 at 09:51, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 30, 2022 at 8:58 AM Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de> wrote:
> >> which I hate with a passion because that allows *unpriviledged* user
> >> space to inject systemwide IPIs every 10ms just to read these counters
> >> which are providing not more than some estimate and are of no value for
> >> the only sane use case of /proc/cpuinfo, i.e. #1 above.
> >
> > You do realize that before my patch, this is already happening ?
> >
> > My "optimization" simply replace an open loop of individual IPI with
> > use of the broadcast IPI capability.
> >
> > Are you saying we should remove IPI broadcast and use loops
> > of IPI, one cpu at a time ?
>
> I rather have no IPIs at all...

Can you send an actual patch, with a changelog then ?

I saw kind of a rant about my patch, which was fine IMO.

Sorry.