| 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: Tue, 15 Mar 2011 14:07:24 +0100 From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de> To: paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com Cc: Lai Jiangshan <laijs@...fujitsu.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Manfred Spraul <manfred@...orfullife.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH V4 1/1] rcu: introduce kfree_rcu() On Tuesday 15 March 2011, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > And it makes use of statically allocated structures a bit clunky. How do statically allocated structures relate to this? I would expect that you never call kfree_rcu on them, so it shouldn't matter. > Yet another approach is to use the low-order bit of the rcu_head pointer, > given that the rcu_head structure does have to be aligned. If this bit > is set, then the function pointer could be interpreted as an offset. > This approach might also allow a slab_free_rcu() to be constructed, given > that the full 32 bits of the function pointer would be available. > For example, if the upper 16 bits are zero, the low-order 16 bits are > the offset. If the upper 16 bits are 0x1, then the low-order 16 bits > might be an index that selects the desired slab cache. This solution sounds like a clear improvement over the patch that Lai Jiangshan posted, without any downsides. Arnd -- 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