linux-kernel - Re: A new spinlock for multicore (>16) platform

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: <CAOpXEOyC4WyOuCbGpoVoqtEMG4emR+wSXDKODqULYN0EpLEKdw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2024 02:10:59 +0800
From: Shi-Wu, Lo（Gmail） <shiwulo@...il.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: Bagas Sanjaya <bagasdotme@...il.com>, 
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, 
	Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>, Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>, Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>, 
	Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, 
	Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, 
	"Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>
Subject: Re: A new spinlock for multicore (>16) platform

Dear Linux Contributors,
Yesterday, I did not inform you that I added the mailing list of the
Operating Systems Laboratory at National Chung Cheng University,
Taiwan, to this discussion. I apologize for this discourtesy. The
mailing list has since been removed.

Could you please give me more advice? For example, should we implement
RON in the kernel under the current circumstances? Or should we
conduct more research before implementing RON in the kernel?
Additionally, is the current approach (where the superuser sets the
routing table) feasible?

shiwu