Re: [RFC PATCH 0/2] ipc: do not hold ipc lock more than necessary
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
- Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/2] ipc: do not hold ipc lock more than necessary
- From: Emmanuel Benisty <benisty.e@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 2 Mar 2013 11:43:08 +0700
- Cc: Rik van Riel <riel@xxxxxxxxxx>, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@xxxxxxxxxxx>, "Vinod, Chegu" <chegu_vinod@xxxxxx>, "Low, Jason" <jason.low2@xxxxxx>, linux-tip-commits@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@xxxxxxxxx>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@xxxxxxxxx>, Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, aquini@xxxxxxxxxx, Michel Lespinasse <walken@xxxxxxxxxx>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxxxxx>, Larry Woodman <lwoodman@xxxxxxxxxx>, Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- In-reply-to: <1362183392.3420.23.camel@buesod1.americas.hpqcorp.net>
Hi,
On Sat, Mar 2, 2013 at 7:16 AM, Davidlohr Bueso <davidlohr.bueso@xxxxxx> wrote:
> The following set of not-thoroughly-tested patches are based on the
> discussion of holding the ipc lock unnecessarily, such as for permissions
> and security checks:
>
> https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/2/28/540
>
> Patch 0/1: Introduces new functions, analogous to ipc_lock and ipc_lock_check
> in the ipc utility code, allowing to obtain the ipc object without holding the lock.
>
> Patch 0/2: Use the new functions and only acquire the ipc lock when needed.
Not sure how much a work in progress this is but my machine dies
immediately when I start chromium, crappy mobile phone picture here:
http://i.imgur.com/S0hfPz3.jpg
Thanks.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-tip-commits" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
[Index of Archives]
[Linux Stable Commits]
[Linux Stable Kernel]
[Linux Kernel]
[Linux USB Devel]
[Linux Video &Media]
[Linux Audio Users]
[Yosemite News]
[Linux SCSI]