linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] locktorture: Allow non-rtmutex lock types to be boosted

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: <2D7B1E52-D2FC-45ED-A739-BA9A1213FD49@joelfernandes.org>
Date:   Thu, 8 Dec 2022 22:58:36 -0500
From:   Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>
To:     Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org>,
        "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>, rcu@...r.kernel.org,
        connoro@...gle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] locktorture: Allow non-rtmutex lock types to be boosted



> On Dec 8, 2022, at 10:50 PM, Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net> wrote:
> 
> On Fri, 09 Dec 2022, Joel Fernandes (Google) wrote:
> 
>> Currently RT boosting is only done for rtmutex_lock, however with proxy
>> execution, we also have the mutex_lock participating in priorities. To
>> exercise the testing better, add RT boosting to other lock testing types
>> as well, using a new knob (rt_boost).
> 
> No particular objection to the patches, but shouldn't these go as part
> of the next iteration of the PE series?

Hey Davidlohr,
Nice to hear from you. Paul was interested in these for some things he is looking at and also as general clean up ;)

Thanks.



> 
> Thanks,
> Davidlohr