netdev - Re: Poll about irqsafe_cpu

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:	Thu, 17 Mar 2011 10:18:15 -0500 (CDT)
From:	Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>
To:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
cc:	eric.dumazet@...il.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	netfilter-devel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Poll about irqsafe_cpu_add and others

On Thu, 17 Mar 2011, David Miller wrote:

>
> I had been meaning to bring this up from another perspective.
>
> In networking, we often only ever access objects in base or
> BH context.  Therefore in BH context cases we can do just
> normal counter bumps without any of the special atomic or
> IRQ disabling code at all.

We have the __ functions for that purpose. __this_cpu_inc f.e. falls back
to a simply ++ operation if the arch cannot provide something better.
irqsafe_xx are only used if the context does not provide any protection
and if there is the potential of the counter being incremented from an
interrupt context.

--
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