linux-kernel - Re: + atomic-improve-atomic_inc_unless_negative-atomic_dec_unless

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 22 Mar 2013 09:34:54 -0700
From:	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Cc:	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
	Ming Lei <tom.leiming@...il.com>, Shaohua Li <shli@...nel.org>,
	Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: +
 atomic-improve-atomic_inc_unless_negative-atomic_dec_unless_positive .patch
 added to -mm tree

On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 03:56:58PM -0700, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> On Thu, 2013-03-21 at 19:30 +0100, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> 
> > To me, it would be better to kill atomic_inc_not_zero_hint() or unify
> > unify it with atomic_inc_not_zero(). But this is another story.
> 
> git is your friend.
> 
> I suggest you read 3f9d35b9514 changelog before killing it, thanks.

Hello, Eric,

Does the addition of a memory barrier in the not-zero case impose
too large a performance penalty?

							Thanx, Paul

--
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/