linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2]: softirq: Add support for triggering softirq work on softirqs.

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: <20080920.033545.171821293.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:	Sat, 20 Sep 2008 03:35:45 -0700 (PDT)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	akpm@...ux-foundation.org
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	jens.axboe@...cle.com, steffen.klassert@...unet.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2]: softirq: Add support for triggering softirq work
 on softirqs.

From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2008 00:46:08 -0700

> Seems from the above `>> 16' you're stuffing the softirq ID into the
> upper 16 bits of call_single_data.flags.  Is it needed?  Another u32
> can be added to call_single_data for free on 64-bit, or it could be
> split into two u16's.

call_single_data is already too large, simply adding it to
struct sk_buff had negative performance impacts that are
forcing me to trim the size of the existing structure a bit.

I think just documenting the usage of the bits is better, and
I'll do that in my next rev.
--
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/