linux-kernel - Re: deferring _

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: <20120623210141.GK14083@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
Date:	Sat, 23 Jun 2012 22:01:41 +0100
From:	Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
To:	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
Cc:	Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	". James Morris" <jmorris@...ei.org>,
	linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: deferring __fput()

On Sat, Jun 23, 2012 at 10:38:00PM +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:

> > Matter of fact, it would become identical to struct rcu_head
> > after that...
> 
> This is not clear to me... Why this is good?

Occam's Razor.

> I understand that sizeof(task_work) == sizeof(rcu_head) would be
> nice, probably you meant just this?

More than that - the callback type is also the same (pointer to such
struct -> void).  IOW, they both look like two instances of the
same thing ("list of callbacks"), differing only in what and
when does calling.
--
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/