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
| ||
|
Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2006 19:30:59 +0100 From: David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com> To: Andi Kleen <ak@...e.de> Cc: Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com>, David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>, Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@...oo.com.au>, Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>, Dong Feng <middle.fengdong@...il.com>, Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: Why Semaphore Hardware-Dependent? Andi Kleen <ak@...e.de> wrote: > BTW maybe it would be a good idea to switch the wait list to a hlist, > then the last user in the queue wouldn't need to > touch the cache line of the head. Or maybe even a single linked > list then some more cache bounces might be avoidable. You need a list_head to get O(1) push at one end and O(1) pop at the other. In addition a singly-linked list makes interruptible ops non-O(1) also. David - 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