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:	Thu, 26 Feb 2009 14:07:02 +0530
From:	Balbir Singh <balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To:	Li Zefan <lizf@...fujitsu.com>
Cc:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
	Paul Menage <menage@...gle.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cpuacct: add a branch prediction

* Li Zefan <lizf@...fujitsu.com> [2009-02-26 15:40:15]:

> cpuacct_charge() is in fast-path, and checking of !cpuacct_susys.active
> always returns false after cpuacct has been initialized at system boot.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Li Zefan <lizf@...fujitsu.com>
> ---
>  kernel/sched.c |    2 +-
>  1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/kernel/sched.c b/kernel/sched.c
> index 410eec4..fd2f7fc 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched.c
> @@ -9589,7 +9589,7 @@ static void cpuacct_charge(struct task_struct *tsk, u64 cputime)
>  	struct cpuacct *ca;
>  	int cpu;
> 
> -	if (!cpuacct_subsys.active)
> +	if (unlikely(!cpuacct_subsys.active))

What happens if most distros make cpuacct_subsys active? Can we decide
on unlikely depending on how the system is configured?


-- 
	Balbir
--
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/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ