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  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:	Thu, 2 Feb 2012 19:59:21 +0000
From:	Ian Campbell <>
To:	Eric Dumazet <>
CC:	"Wei Liu (Intern)" <>,
	"" <>,
	"" <>,
	"" <>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH V4 02/13] netback: add module unload function.

On Thu, 2012-02-02 at 17:48 +0000, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> Le jeudi 02 février 2012 à 17:28 +0000, Wei Liu a écrit :
> > You're right about this.
> > 
> > But this part is destined to get wiped out (in the very near future?) --
> > see following patches. So I don't think it is worthy to fix this.
> > 
> Before adding new bugs, you must fix previous ones.

I've never heard of this requirement before! It's a wonder anyone ever
gets anything done.

Anyway, I think it would be reasonable to just remove the kthread_bind
call from this loop. We don't actually want/need a thread per online CPU
in any strict sense, we just want there to be some number of worker
threads available and ~numcpus at start of day is a good enough
approximation for that number. There have been patches floating around
in the past which make the number of groups a module parameter which
would also be a reasonable thing to dig out if we weren't just about to
remove all this code anyway.

So removing the kthread_bind is good enough for the short term, and for
stable if people feel that is necessary, and we can continue in mainline
with the direction Wei's patches are taking us.


To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists