linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 00/13] Re: Scalability requirements for sysv ipc

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:	Mon, 14 Apr 2008 07:18:54 +0200
From:	Nadia Derbey <Nadia.Derbey@...l.net>
To:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:	efault@....de, manfred@...orfullife.com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, xemul@...nvz.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/13] Re: Scalability requirements for sysv ipc

Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Fri, 2008-04-11 at 18:17 +0200, Nadia.Derbey@...l.net wrote:
> 
>>Here is finally the ipc ridr-based implementation I was talking about last
>>week (see http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/4/4/208).
>>I couldn't avoid much of the code duplication, but at least made things
>>incremental.
>>
>>Does somebody now a test suite that exists for the idr API, that I could
>>run on this new api?
>>
>>Mike, can you try to run it on your victim: I had such a hard time building
>>this patch, that I couldn't re-run the test on my 8-core with this new
>>version. So the last results I have are for 2.6.25-rc3-mm1.
>>
>>Also, I think a careful review should be done to avoid introducing yet other
>>problems :-(
> 
> 
> Why duplicate the whole thing, when we converted the Radix tree to be
> RCU safe we did it in-place. Is there a reason this is not done for idr?
> 
> 
> 

I did that because I wanted to go fast and try to fix the performance 
problem we have with sysV ipc's. I didn't want to introduce (yet other) 
regressions in the code that uses idr's today and that works well ;-)
May be in the future if this rcu based api appears to be ok, we can 
replace one with the other?

Regards,
Nadia



--
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/