linux-kernel - Re: [patch 4/4] ipc: sem optimise simple operations

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: <4A85A47D.5080600@colorfullife.com>
Date:	Fri, 14 Aug 2009 19:53:01 +0200
From:	Manfred Spraul <manfred@...orfullife.com>
To:	Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>
CC:	Zach Brown <zach.brown@...cle.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Nadia Derbey <Nadia.Derbey@...l.net>,
	Pierre Peiffer <peifferp@...il.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch 4/4] ipc: sem optimise simple operations

On 08/14/2009 10:58 AM, Nick Piggin wrote:
> I do like how it cleanly splits the modify and non-modify operations
> though. But if you feel strongly about saving the sapce, I will
> do as you suggest.
>
>    
No, saving space is secondary.

IMHO the global and the local lists should use the same algorithm, 
that's the main point.
Perhaps even the same function could be used:
One global struct sem_waiters {struct list_head zero; struct list_head 
decrease}.
One struct sem_waiters for each semaphore.

Then something like

     update_queue(sma, sma->complex_ops ? &sma->global_waiters : 
&sma->sem_base[i].local_waiters);

--
     Manfred
--
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/