| 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
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2009 15:02:48 +0200 From: Manfred Spraul <manfred@...orfullife.com> To: Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de> CC: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Nadia Derbey <Nadia.Derbey@...l.net>, Pierre Peiffer <peifferp@...il.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] [patch 4a/4] ipc: sem optimise simple operations On 08/17/2009 08:44 AM, Nick Piggin wrote: > OK, well let's just get something in. > Good, I would propose the that the following 7 patches should be merged: http://lkml.org/lkml/2009/8/11/59 http://lkml.org/lkml/2009/8/11/9 http://lkml.org/lkml/2009/8/11/14 http://lkml.org/lkml/2009/8/15/163 http://lkml.org/lkml/2009/8/15/164 http://lkml.org/lkml/2009/8/15/167 http://lkml.org/lkml/2009/8/15/168 Nick: is that ok from your point of view? > That said, I'm not too unhappy with your version if you feel strongly > about it. I would prefer it: We simply don't know if a wait-for-zero list, only for single sop operations, is a step in the right direction. Postgres uses single sop operations with just +-1 on one semaphore. You wrote that your SAP workload also uses +-1. According to google codesearch, apache, mozilla, mpich all use +-1. Thus: Who uses single sop, wait for zero? I'm just afraid that we optimize for the wrong case. -- Manfred -- 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists