Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2017 09:14:00 +0000 From: "Reshetova, Elena" <elena.reshetova@...el.com> To: "gregkh@...uxfoundation.org" <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org> CC: David Windsor <dwindsor@...il.com>, Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, AKASHI Takahiro <takahiro.akashi@...aro.org>, "kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com" <kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com>, "arnd@...db.de" <arnd@...db.de>, "tglx@...utronix.de" <tglx@...utronix.de>, "mingo@...hat.com" <mingo@...hat.com>, "Anvin, H Peter" <h.peter.anvin@...el.com>, "will.deacon@....com" <will.deacon@....com>, "ishkamiel@...il.com" <ishkamiel@...il.com> Subject: RE: [RFC PATCH 08/19] kernel, mm: convert from atomic_t to refcount_t > On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 08:41:17AM +0000, Reshetova, Elena wrote: > > > Do you have any particular workload that you've been testing these with? > > > > No, we only tested the full boot, that's why I would like to understand how to > test more. > > I think it is not so much about the workload, but about testing > > different configuration. Like for example, when AKASHI Takahiro run > > the patches on top on NFS rootfs, it has shown the issue we haven't > > seen in our case. You can imagine how many of such cases are still > > hiding given the number of configurations and drivers that get active > > in runtime. > > That is why you need to post the patches so that the subsystem > maintainers can review them! They are the ones that know the code the > best, why you all don't want to let them at least review the changes is > beyond me... > I was just in process of posting them... Now done.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.