| 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
| ||
|
Date: Fri, 25 May 2012 17:48:48 -0500 From: Daniel Santos <danielfsantos@....net> To: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Generic Red-Black Trees (status update) For anybody that's keeping up with this, I've gone through multiple iterations and tests with 9 different gcc versions and concluded that the search, insert & remove cores need to be coded in rbtree.h, using the traditional interface (i.e., passing struct rb_node & rb_root pointers instead of pointers to your specific object types). The reason is that gcc can't handle the cool fully-generic code until 4.6. In gcc 4.5.x, optimization completely breaks expanding the inline functions into huge bloated monsters. Also, while I'm re-coding it all, I'm adding find_near & insert_near, for more efficient insertion & retrieval when you already have a node that should be close to the one you want (which is often the case when inserting many objects at once). So after I'm done with this, I'll start on a new header file (grbtree.h probably) using the "grb_" prefix for it's functions that implements the gcc 4.6.x+ fully generic & type safe interface, but using cute pre-processor tricks for pre-4.6.x compatibility (basically, something to consider using once gcc 4.6+ is more widely used). Daniel -- 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