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 PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2019 09:18:34 -0700 From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org> To: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com> Cc: Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@...hat.com>, Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>, Pankaj Gupta <pagupta@...hat.com>, linux-nvdimm <linux-nvdimm@...ts.01.org>, Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org, KVM list <kvm@...r.kernel.org>, linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>, Linux ACPI <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>, Qemu Developers <qemu-devel@...gnu.org>, linux-ext4 <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>, linux-xfs <linux-xfs@...r.kernel.org>, Ross Zwisler <zwisler@...nel.org>, Vishal L Verma <vishal.l.verma@...el.com>, Dave Jiang <dave.jiang@...el.com>, "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>, Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>, Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>, "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>, Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>, Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>, Andreas Dilger <adilger.kernel@...ger.ca>, "Darrick J. Wong" <darrick.wong@...cle.com>, lcapitulino@...hat.com, Kevin Wolf <kwolf@...hat.com>, Igor Mammedov <imammedo@...hat.com>, Nitesh Narayan Lal <nilal@...hat.com>, Rik van Riel <riel@...riel.com>, Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@...hat.com>, Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>, David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>, david <david@...morbit.com>, cohuck@...hat.com, Xiao Guangrong <xiaoguangrong.eric@...il.com>, Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>, kilobyte@...band.pl, yuval shaia <yuval.shaia@...cle.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 1/6] libnvdimm: nd_region flush callback support On Thu, Apr 18, 2019 at 09:05:05AM -0700, Dan Williams wrote: > > > I'd either add a comment about avoiding retpoline overhead here or just > > > make ->flush == NULL mean generic_nvdimm_flush(). Just so that people don't > > > get confused by the code. > > > > Isn't this premature optimization? I really don't like adding things > > like this without some numbers to show it's worth it. > > I don't think it's premature given this optimization technique is > already being deployed elsewhere, see: > > https://lwn.net/Articles/774347/ For one this one was backed by numbers, and second after feedback from Linux we switched to the NULL pointer check instead.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists