Your MUA is having trouble wrapping text at 78 chars.
On Thu, Oct 01, 2020 at 09:49:30AM +1000, Singh, Balbir wrote:
> So this is the change I am playing with, I don't like the idea of
> killing the task, but it's better than silently not flushing, I guess
> system administrators will learn
On Thu, Oct 01 2020 at 10:48, Balbir Singh wrote:
> On 1/10/20 9:49 am, Singh, Balbir wrote:
>>
>> +static void l1d_flush_kill(struct callback_head *ch)
>> +{
>> +clear_ti_thread_flag(>thread_info, TIF_SPEC_L1D_FLUSH);
>> +force_signal(SIGBUS);
>> +}
>> +
>> void switch_mm(struct
On 1/10/20 9:49 am, Singh, Balbir wrote:
> On 1/10/20 7:38 am, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 30 2020 at 20:35, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>>> On Wed, Sep 30, 2020 at 08:00:59PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Wed, Sep 30 2020 at 19:03, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Wed, Sep
On 1/10/20 7:38 am, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>
>
>
> On Wed, Sep 30 2020 at 20:35, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>> On Wed, Sep 30, 2020 at 08:00:59PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>>> On Wed, Sep 30 2020 at 19:03, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
On Wed, Sep 30, 2020 at 05:40:08PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner
On 1/10/20 7:38 am, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click
> links or open attachments unless you can confirm the sender and know the
> content is safe.
>
>
>
> On Wed, Sep 30 2020 at 20:35, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>> On Wed, Sep
On 1/10/20 4:00 am, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click
> links or open attachments unless you can confirm the sender and know the
> content is safe.
>
>
>
> On Wed, Sep 30 2020 at 19:03, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>> On Wed, Sep
On Wed, Sep 30 2020 at 20:35, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 30, 2020 at 08:00:59PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>> On Wed, Sep 30 2020 at 19:03, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>> > On Wed, Sep 30, 2020 at 05:40:08PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>> > Also, that preempt_disable() in there doesn't
On Wed, Sep 30, 2020 at 08:00:59PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 30 2020 at 19:03, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 30, 2020 at 05:40:08PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > Also, that preempt_disable() in there doesn't actually do anything.
> > Worse, preempt_disable();
On Wed, Sep 30 2020 at 19:03, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 30, 2020 at 05:40:08PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> Also, that preempt_disable() in there doesn't actually do anything.
> Worse, preempt_disable(); for_each_cpu(); is an anti-pattern. It mixes
> static_cpu_has() and
On Wed, Sep 30, 2020 at 05:40:08PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 29 2020 at 10:37, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > Here, I fixed it..
>
> Well, no. What Balbir is trying to do here is to establish whether a
> task runs on a !SMT core. sched_smt_active() is system wide, but their
> setup
On Wed, 30 Sep 2020, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 29 2020 at 10:37, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > Here, I fixed it..
>
> Well, no. What Balbir is trying to do here is to establish whether a
> task runs on a !SMT core. sched_smt_active() is system wide, but their
> setup is to have a bunch
On Tue, Sep 29 2020 at 10:37, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> Here, I fixed it..
Well, no. What Balbir is trying to do here is to establish whether a
task runs on a !SMT core. sched_smt_active() is system wide, but their
setup is to have a bunch of SMT enabled cores and cores where SMT is off
because the
On Tue, Sep 29, 2020 at 09:12:11AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 28, 2020 at 02:44:57PM +0200, Lukas Bulwahn wrote:
> > diff --git a/arch/x86/mm/tlb.c b/arch/x86/mm/tlb.c
> > index 6b0f4c88b07c..90515c04d90a 100644
> > --- a/arch/x86/mm/tlb.c
> > +++ b/arch/x86/mm/tlb.c
> > @@ -316,7
On Tue, 29 Sep 2020, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 28, 2020 at 02:44:57PM +0200, Lukas Bulwahn wrote:
> > diff --git a/arch/x86/mm/tlb.c b/arch/x86/mm/tlb.c
> > index 6b0f4c88b07c..90515c04d90a 100644
> > --- a/arch/x86/mm/tlb.c
> > +++ b/arch/x86/mm/tlb.c
> > @@ -316,7 +316,7 @@
On Mon, Sep 28, 2020 at 02:44:57PM +0200, Lukas Bulwahn wrote:
> diff --git a/arch/x86/mm/tlb.c b/arch/x86/mm/tlb.c
> index 6b0f4c88b07c..90515c04d90a 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/mm/tlb.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/mm/tlb.c
> @@ -316,7 +316,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(leave_mm);
>
> int
On Mon, Sep 28, 2020 at 02:44:57PM +0200, Lukas Bulwahn wrote:
> Commit b6724f118d44 ("prctl: Hook L1D flushing in via prctl") checks the
> validity for enable_l1d_flush_for_task() and introduces some superfluous
> local variables for that implementation.
>
> make clang-analyzer on x86_64
Commit b6724f118d44 ("prctl: Hook L1D flushing in via prctl") checks the
validity for enable_l1d_flush_for_task() and introduces some superfluous
local variables for that implementation.
make clang-analyzer on x86_64 tinyconfig caught my attention with:
arch/x86/mm/tlb.c:332:2: warning: Value
17 matches
Mail list logo
