linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH -v7][RFC]: mutex: implement adaptive spinning

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: <alpine.LFD.2.00.0901091347170.6528@localhost.localdomain>
Date:	Fri, 9 Jan 2009 13:50:13 -0800 (PST)
From:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Harvey Harrison <harvey.harrison@...il.com>
cc:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
	Chris Mason <chris.mason@...cle.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
	paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, Gregory Haskins <ghaskins@...ell.com>,
	Matthew Wilcox <matthew@....cx>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-btrfs <linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>,
	Peter Morreale <pmorreale@...ell.com>,
	Sven Dietrich <SDietrich@...ell.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -v7][RFC]: mutex: implement adaptive spinning

On Fri, 9 Jan 2009, Harvey Harrison wrote:
> 
> __needs_inline?  That would imply that it's for correctness reasons.

.. but the point is, we have _thousands_ of inlines, and do you know which 
is which? We've historically forced them to be inlined, and every time 
somebody does that "OPTIMIZE_INLINE=y", something simply _breaks_.

So instead of just continually hitting our head against this wall because 
some people seem to be convinced that gcc can do a good job, just do it 
the other way around. Make the new one be "inline_hint" (no underscores 
needed, btw), and there is ansolutely ZERO confusion about what it means. 

At that point, everybody knows why it's there, and it's clearly not a 
correctness issue or anything else.

Of course, at that point you might as well argue that the thing should not 
exist at all, and that such a flag should just be removed entirely. Which 
I certainly agree with - I think the only flag we need is "inline", and I 
think it should mean what it damn well says.

		Linus
--
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/