linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] dentry: move to per-sb LRU locks

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: <1312808544.10488.31.camel@twins>
Date:	Mon, 08 Aug 2011 15:02:24 +0200
From:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:	Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>
Cc:	viro@...IV.linux.org.uk, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] dentry: move to per-sb LRU locks

On Mon, 2011-08-08 at 17:03 +1000, Dave Chinner wrote:
> +       /* s_dentry_lru_lock protects s_dentry_lru, s_nr_dentry_unused */
> +       spinlock_t              s_dentry_lru_lock ____cacheline_aligned_in_smp;
>         struct list_head        s_dentry_lru;   /* unused dentry lru */ 

Wouldn't it make sense to have both those on the same cacheline?
--
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/