| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <4D67AA06.5090200@cs.helsinki.fi> Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2011 15:09:26 +0200 From: Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi> To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com> CC: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>, Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com> Subject: Re: [cpuops cmpxchg double V2 1/4] Generic support for this_cpu_cmpxchg_double On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 09:13:41AM -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote: >>> We could do cmpxchg with a structure... the problem with a lon int >>> type is that Cristoph ran into bugs with __int128 on 64 bits. On 01/21/2011 09:19 AM, Tejun Heo wrote: >> But, IIRC, the problem with int128 was with passing it as parameter >> and return value. We don't have to do that. We'll be just using it >> as a data storage / container type. Or even that is broken? On 1/24/11 8:01 AM, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > Well, part of the point was to pass in registers. > > No idea on the data storage type. Ping? The current situation is that we're unable to merge a perfectly good SLUB performance optimization because we can't seem to agree on the this_cpu_cmpxchg_double() API. Pekka -- 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