linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 6/6] cls_cgroup: remove redundant rcu_read

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: <20120201.021002.1399660597996401402.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:	Wed, 01 Feb 2012 02:10:02 -0500 (EST)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	eric.dumazet@...il.com
Cc:	lizf@...fujitsu.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, cgroups@...r.kernel.org,
	nhorman@...driver.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/6] cls_cgroup: remove redundant rcu_read_lock/unlock

From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Date: Wed, 01 Feb 2012 08:07:19 +0100

> Then, I wonder why we do the "if (classid && classid != sk->sk_classid)"
> 
> before the :
> 
> 	sk->sk_classid = classid;
> 
> This seems unnecessary checks.
> 

Avoiding dirtying the sk->sk_classid cache line unnecessarily?

I actually have no idea actually how often this routine can get
invoked in real world scenerios.
--
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/