linux-kernel - Re: [RFC 00/15] x86_64: Optimize percpu accesses

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: <m1prpmsoxa.fsf@frodo.ebiederm.org>
Date:	Wed, 09 Jul 2008 14:55:29 -0700
From:	ebiederm@...ssion.com (Eric W. Biederman)
To:	Mike Travis <travis@....com>
Cc:	"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
	Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Jack Steiner <steiner@....com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC 00/15] x86_64: Optimize percpu accesses

Mike Travis <travis@....com> writes:

> Hi Eric,
>
> There is one pda op that I was not able to remove.  Most likely it can be
> recoded
> but it was a bit over my expertise.  Most likely the "pda_offset(field)" can be
> replaced with "per_cpu_var(field)" [per_cpu__##field], but for
> "_proxy_pda.field"
> I wasn't sure about.

If you notice we never use %1.  My reading would be we just have the +m
there to tell the compiler we may be changing the field.  So just
a reference to the per_cpu_var directly should be sufficient.  Although
"memory" may actually be enough.

Eric
--
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/