linux-kernel - Re: Jump Label initialization

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: <4E84A09A.2030909@goop.org>
Date:	Thu, 29 Sep 2011 09:45:15 -0700
From:	Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>
To:	Jan Glauber <jang@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
CC:	Jason Baron <jbaron@...hat.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Michael Ellerman <michael@...erman.id.au>,
	David Daney <ddaney@...iumnetworks.com>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: Re: Jump Label initialization

On 09/29/2011 05:04 AM, Jan Glauber wrote:
>
> s390 does not have the early() variant since it didn't need it. On
> pre-SMP we probably don't need stop_machine() so creating
> arch_jump_label_transform_early() by leaving out stop_machine()
> and patching the code directly should be fine.

Well, it occurs to me that if you're using jump_label_enable() very
early, then it will be using the full arch_jump_label_transform()
anyway.  While the stop_machine(), locking, etc that the full version
does is redundant in a pre-SMP environment, it shouldn't hurt, so
perhaps there's no need for an _early variant at all.

    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/