linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/3] wait-simple: Introduce the simple waitqueue implementation

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:	Thu, 12 Dec 2013 00:03:14 -0800
From:	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To:	Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@...driver.com>
Cc:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
	Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] wait-simple: Introduce the simple waitqueue
 implementation

On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 08:06:37PM -0500, Paul Gortmaker wrote:
> From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
> 
> The wait_queue is a swiss army knife and in most of the cases the
> full complexity is not needed.  Here we provide a slim version, as
> it lowers memory consumption and runtime overhead.

Might it make more sense to just make the simple one the default and use
the complex one in the few cases that need it?

It would also be good to enumerate those cases.  The wake callbacks come
to mind, but I guess there are more?

--
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/