linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] bitops: remove "optimizations"

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:	Tue, 29 Apr 2008 03:03:32 -0700 (PDT)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	tglx@...utronix.de
Cc:	torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, harvey.harrison@...il.com,
	mingo@...e.hu, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] bitops: remove "optimizations"

From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2008 12:01:02 +0200 (CEST)

> The mapsize optimizations which were moved from x86 to the generic
> code in commit 64970b68d2b3ed32b964b0b30b1b98518fde388e increased the
> binary size on non x86 architectures.
> 
> Looking into the real effects of the "optimizations" it turned out
> that they are not used in find_next_bit() and find_next_zero_bit().
> 
> The ones in find_first_bit() and find_first_zero_bit() are used in a
> couple of places but none of them is a real hot path.
> 
> Remove the "optimizations" all together and call the library functions
> unconditionally.
> 
> Boot-tested on x86 and compile tested on every cross compiler I have.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>

Acked-by: David S. Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
--
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/