linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 66/86] treewide: kernel: remove cond

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:   Fri, 17 Nov 2023 14:51:10 -0500
From:   Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To:     Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@...nel.org>
Cc:     Ankur Arora <ankur.a.arora@...cle.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, tglx@...utronix.de,
        peterz@...radead.org, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
        paulmck@...nel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org, x86@...nel.org,
        akpm@...ux-foundation.org, luto@...nel.org, bp@...en8.de,
        dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com, hpa@...or.com, mingo@...hat.com,
        juri.lelli@...hat.com, vincent.guittot@...aro.org,
        willy@...radead.org, mgorman@...e.de, jon.grimm@....com,
        bharata@....com, raghavendra.kt@....com,
        boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com, konrad.wilk@...cle.com,
        jgross@...e.com, andrew.cooper3@...rix.com, mingo@...nel.org,
        bristot@...nel.org, mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com,
        geert@...ux-m68k.org, glaubitz@...sik.fu-berlin.de,
        anton.ivanov@...bridgegreys.com, mattst88@...il.com,
        krypton@...ich-teichert.org, David.Laight@...lab.com,
        richard@....at, mjguzik@...il.com, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
        Zefan Li <lizefan.x@...edance.com>,
        Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
        Peter Oberparleiter <oberpar@...ux.ibm.com>,
        Eric Biederman <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
        Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 66/86] treewide: kernel: remove cond_resched()

On Fri, 17 Nov 2023 10:14:33 -0800
Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@...nel.org> wrote:

> Sounds like the sort of test which should be put into linux-next to get
> test coverage right away. To see what really blows up.

No, it shouldn't have been added this early in the development. It depends
on the first part of this patch series, that needs to finished first.

Ankur just gave his full vision of the RFC. You can ignore the removal of
the cond_resched() for the time being.

Thanks for looking at it Luis!

-- Steve