netdev - Re: [RFC PATCH 3/8] [NET]: uninline dev_alloc

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, 20 Feb 2008 17:19:37 +0100 (CET)
From:	Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@...putergmbh.de>
To:	Ilpo Järvinen <ilpo.jarvinen@...sinki.fi>
cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 3/8] [NET]: uninline dev_alloc_skb, de-bloats a lot


On Feb 20 2008 15:47, Ilpo Järvinen wrote:
>
>-23668  392 funcs, 104 +, 23772 -, diff: -23668 --- dev_alloc_skb
>
>-static inline struct sk_buff *dev_alloc_skb(unsigned int length)
>-{
>-	return __dev_alloc_skb(length, GFP_ATOMIC);
>-}
>+extern struct sk_buff *dev_alloc_skb(unsigned int length);

Striking. How can this even happen? A callsite which calls

	dev_alloc_skb(n)

is just equivalent to

	__dev_alloc_skb(n, GFP_ATOMIC);

which means there's like 4 (or 8 if it's long) bytes more on the
stack. For a worst case, count in another 8 bytes for push and pop or mov on
the stack. But that still does not add up to 23 kb.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html