netdev - Re: [PATCH] netfilter: use per-cpu recursive lock (v10)

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 21 Apr 2009 08:41:36 +1000
From:	Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>
To:	paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com
Cc:	Eric Dumazet <dada1@...mosbay.com>,
	Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...tta.com>,
	Evgeniy Polyakov <zbr@...emap.net>,
	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, kaber@...sh.net,
	torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, jeff.chua.linux@...il.com,
	mingo@...e.hu, laijs@...fujitsu.com, jengelh@...ozas.de,
	r000n@...0n.net, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	netfilter-devel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	benh@...nel.crashing.org, mathieu.desnoyers@...ymtl.ca
Subject: Re: [PATCH] netfilter: use per-cpu recursive lock (v10)

Paul E. McKenney writes:

> But a single CPU is acquiring one lock per CPU, so all the increments
> are to one CPU's preempt_count.  :-(

OK, I see, so a task can't take more than 255 spinlocks without
overflowing the preempt count, which seems a bit limiting.

There are 6 free bits in the preempt_count currently, so the preempt
count could be expanded to 14 bits, which would be enough for all
current systems.  Beyond that I guess we could make preempt_count be a
long and allow bigger counts on 64-bit architectures.

Paul.
--
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