linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/2] ia64: possible module unwind table optimisation

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:	Wed, 15 Sep 2010 10:28:59 -0700
From:	Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>
To:	Phil Carmody <ext-phil.2.carmody@...ia.com>
Cc:	"fenghua.yu@...el.com" <fenghua.yu@...el.com>,
	"linux-ia64@...r.kernel.org" <linux-ia64@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] ia64: possible module unwind table optimisation

On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 5:48 AM, Phil Carmody
<ext-phil.2.carmody@...ia.com> wrote:
>>   for (table = unw.tables; table; table = table->next)
>>
>> before we find the right table to look?
>
> Yes, that's the one. Sorry I wasn't more explicit.

My usual workload (building new Linux kernels - what else :-) doesn't
seem to generate
any unwind requests.  I reached the loop just 58 times while booting,
and only did 23
steps past the first item [didn't track a histogram, so I don't know
whether that was a
single 23 step lookup, or 23 one-step ones].  Building the kernel
(make -j32) didn't add
to either count.

Workload ideas?

-Tony
--
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/