linux-kernel - Re: [rfc][patch] x86-64 new smp_call

lists.openwall.net		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 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce 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:	Wed, 27 Feb 2008 14:27:13 +0100
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To:	Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>
Cc:	Andi Kleen <ak@...e.de>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-arch@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [rfc][patch] x86-64 new smp_call_function design


* Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de> wrote:

> This isn't finished yet, however I'd just like to ask for comments.

looks really interesting!

only one fundamental observation:

> +struct call_data {
> +	spinlock_t lock;
> +	struct list_head list;
>  	void (*func) (void *info);
>  	void *info;
> +	unsigned int flags;
> +	unsigned int refs;
> +	cpumask_t cpumask;
> +	struct rcu_head rcu_head;
>  };

> +struct call_single_data {
> +	struct list_head list;
> +	void (*func) (void *info);
> +	void *info;
> +	unsigned int flags;
> +};

the two structures are quite similar in size and role - why not have a 
type field and handle them largely together? I think we should try to 
preserve a single queue and a single vector - that would remove a number 
of ugly special-cases from the patch.

	Ingo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/