linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/1] mm: unify pmd

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, 28 Jul 2008 18:17:29 +0200
From:	Andrea Righi <righi.andrea@...il.com>
To:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
CC:	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
	linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] mm: unify pmd_free() implementation

Linus Torvalds wrote:
> 
> On Mon, 28 Jul 2008, Andrea Righi wrote:
>> Move multiple definitions of pmd_free() from different include/asm-* into
>> mm/util.c.
> 
> But this is horrible, because it forces a totally unnecessary function 
> call for that empty function.
> 
> Yeah, the function will be cheap, but the call itself will not be (it's a 
> C language barrier and basically disables optimizations around it, causing 
> thigns like register spill/reload for no good reason).
> 
> 		Linus

yep! clear.

Ok, in this case wouldn't be better at least to define pud_free() as:

static inline pud_free(struct mm_struct *mm, pmd_t *pmd)
{
}

in include/asm-generic/pgtable-nopmd.h, just to avoid the warning
on x86 without PAE?

Thanks for the explanation,
-Andrea
--
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/