From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932527AbWGZLo1 (ORCPT ); Wed, 26 Jul 2006 07:44:27 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932529AbWGZLo0 (ORCPT ); Wed, 26 Jul 2006 07:44:26 -0400 Received: from host36-195-149-62.serverdedicati.aruba.it ([62.149.195.36]:5797 "EHLO mx.cpushare.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932527AbWGZLo0 (ORCPT ); Wed, 26 Jul 2006 07:44:26 -0400 Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2006 13:45:34 +0200 From: andrea@cpushare.com To: Ingo Molnar Cc: linux-kernel , Chuck Ebbert <76306.1226@compuserve.com>, "bruce@andrew.cmu.edu" , Alan Cox , Arjan van de Ven , Adrian Bunk , Lee Revell , Linus Torvalds Subject: Re: [PATCH] TIF_NOTSC and SECCOMP prctl Message-ID: <20060726114534.GG32243@opteron.random> References: <200607180623_MC3-1-C54F-3802@compuserve.com> <20060718132941.GG5726@opteron.random> <20060725214441.GC32243@opteron.random> <20060726080739.GA10574@elte.hu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20060726080739.GA10574@elte.hu> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Jul 26, 2006 at 10:07:39AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * andrea@cpushare.com wrote: > > > Here a repost of the last seccomp patch against current mainline > > including the preempt fix. This changes the seccomp API from > > /proc//seccomp to a prctl (this will produce a smaller kernel) > > and it adds a TIF_NOTSC that seccomp sets. Only the current task can > > call disable_TSC (obviously because it hasn't a task_t param). This > > includes Chuck's patch to give zero runtime cost to the notsc feature. > > please send a patch-queue that is properly split-up: the bugfix, the API > change and the TIF_NOTSC improvement. Which bugfix do you mean? If you mean the preempt fix for the NOTSC improvement it makes no sense to split it up from the NOTSC part. There are no other bugfixes (the reduction of the notsc window isn't strictly a bugfix, since the feature already helped). I can split the API change from the NOTSC feature, I'll wait some more days in the hope this one goes in. If it doesn't go in I'll follow your suggestion and I'll try again later with the split up in the hope to increase my chances. >>From my point of view it's not urgent to merge it, it's just the anti-seccomp advocates that should want this patch being merged urgently.