| 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
| ||
|
Date: Tue, 9 Jun 2009 17:31:20 +0200 From: Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de> To: Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@...el.com> Cc: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>, "akpm@...ux-foundation.org" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, "linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH] [11/16] HWPOISON: check and isolate corrupted free pages v2 On Tue, Jun 09, 2009 at 10:56:14PM +0800, Wu Fengguang wrote: > > Moving hot and cold functions together could become an issue > > indeed. Mostly it probably matters a little less than code > > within a single function due to their size. But I think gcc > > already has options to annotate this kind of thing which we > > could be using. > > Can we tell gcc "I bet this _function_ is rarely used"? Yes you can annotate a function as hot or cold. > > So it's not such a good argument against moving things out of > > hotpaths, or guiding in which files to place functions. > > Yes. > > > Anyway, in this case it is not a "nack" from me. Just that I > > would like to see the non-fastpath code too or at least if > > it can be thought about. > > I think Andi would be pleased to present you with his buddy page > isolation code :) -- 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