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]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0608021805150.26314@schroedinger.engr.sgi.com>
Date:	Wed, 2 Aug 2006 18:06:45 -0700 (PDT)
From:	Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com>
To:	Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>
cc:	Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...source.com>, akpm@...l.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, virtualization@...ts.osdl.org,
	xen-devel@...ts.xensource.com, Ian Pratt <ian.pratt@...source.com>,
	Christian Limpach <Christian.Limpach@...cam.ac.uk>,
	Chris Wright <chrisw@...s-sol.org>
Subject: Re: [patch 2/8] Implement always-locked bit ops, for memory shared
 with an SMP hypervisor.

On Wed, 2 Aug 2006, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:

> > Would it not be simpler to always use the locked implementation on UP? At
> > least when the kernel is compiled with hypervisor support? This is going to
> > add yet another series of bit operations
> 
> You mean make the standard bit-ops atomic on UP when compiling for
> CONFIG_PARAVIRT?  We think its too much of a burden; there are only a few
> operations which must be locked in the hypervisor case, and bit ops are used
> everywhere.  I'd like to get it to the point where there's no significant
> overhead in configuring for PARAVIRT, even if you run on native hardware.

Thats a good goal but what about the rest of us who have to maintain 
additional forms of bit operations for all architectures. How much is this 
burden? Are locked atomic bitops really that more expensive?
-
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/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ