linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] DM-CRYPT: Scale to multiple CPUs

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:	Mon, 31 May 2010 19:52:08 +0200
From:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
Cc:	herbert@...dor.apana.org.au, dm-devel@...hat.com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, agk@...hat.com, ak@...ux.intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] DM-CRYPT: Scale to multiple CPUs

Le lundi 31 mai 2010 à 19:46 +0200, Andi Kleen a écrit :
> On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 06:34:55PM +0200, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> 
> Yes seems like I'm behind on per cpu innovations.
> 
> > Since commit e0fdb0e050eae331, we have a __percpu annotation so that
> > sparse can be augmented. This would also make the comment unnecessary...
> 
> I think the comment is still necessary.
> 
> > 
> > > +       __get_cpu_var(io_wq_cpu) = current;
> > 
> > 	this_cpu_write(io_wq_cpu, current)
> 
> And this one looks more ugly than before and does not seem
> to generate better code, so I decided to skip it.

This is because you whould use __this_cpu_write() in this context of
course ;)

generated code : one instruction



--
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/