linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH net-next 00/24] locking: Introduce nested-BH locking.

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: <20231215145059.3b42ee35@kernel.org>
Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2023 14:50:59 -0800
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org, "David S. Miller"
 <davem@...emloft.net>, Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>, Daniel Borkmann
 <daniel@...earbox.net>, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, Frederic
 Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Paolo
 Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, Thomas
 Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>, Will
 Deacon <will@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 00/24] locking: Introduce nested-BH locking.

On Fri, 15 Dec 2023 18:07:19 +0100 Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> The proposed way out is to introduce explicit per-CPU locks for
> resources which are protected by local_bh_disable() and use those only
> on PREEMPT_RT so there is no additional overhead for !PREEMPT_RT builds.

As I said at LPC, complicating drivers with odd locking constructs
is a no go for me.