linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/7] revoke: add f

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]

Date:	Fri, 9 Mar 2007 19:02:24 +0200
From:	"Pekka Enberg" <penberg@...helsinki.fi>
To:	"Benjamin LaHaise" <bcrl@...ck.org>
Cc:	"Eric Dumazet" <dada1@...mosbay.com>, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, hch@...radead.org,
	alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk, serue@...ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/7] revoke: add f_light flag for struct file

On Fri, Mar 09, 2007 at 12:13:35PM +0100, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> > Then just drop the fget_light() 'optimisation' and always take a reference
> > (atomic on f_count) regardless of single-thread or not. Instead of dirtying
> > f_light, just do the straightforward thing and be with it.
> >
> > (that is : fget_light() = fget() = no more keeping fput_needed everywhere, and
> > convoluted things in some dark sides of the kernel.

On 3/9/07, Benjamin LaHaise <bcrl@...ck.org> wrote:
> And it makes things rather slower for a lot of single threaded applications
> on modern systems.  Yes, fget_light can be done much more cleanly, but please
> don't go around ripping out optimizations just because.

Don't worry, the fget_light() bits are no longer needed:
http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/3/9/151
-
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/