linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 06/18] x86/ticketlock: make __ticket_spin

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: <4E5571C6.10704@goop.org>
Date:	Wed, 24 Aug 2011 14:48:54 -0700
From:	Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>
To:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
CC:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@...nel.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Nick Piggin <npiggin@...nel.dk>,
	Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy.fitzhardinge@...rix.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 06/18] x86/ticketlock: make __ticket_spin_trylock common

On 08/24/2011 02:43 PM, Andi Kleen wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 02:38:12PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>> On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 1:00 PM, Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org> wrote:
>>> Can't we just get rid of the small ticket size code path?
>>>
>>> I couldn't benchmark any difference between the two last time
>>> I tried.
>> The small locks aren't any faster. They are just smaller.
> Are you sure? 
>
> AFAIK it's always
>
> typedef struct arch_spinlock {
>         unsigned int slock;
> } arch_spinlock_t;

Hm, I changed that in this series; arch_spinlock can be 16 bits in the
<256 case.  I wonder if it matters...

    J
--
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/