| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20130507200948.GC8879@Krystal> Date: Tue, 7 May 2013 16:09:48 -0400 From: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com> To: Eric Wong <normalperson@...t.net> Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Davide Libenzi <davidel@...ilserver.org>, Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC v2] epoll: avoid spinlock contention with wfcqueue * Eric Wong (normalperson@...t.net) wrote: > Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com> wrote: [...] > > I'm also not entirely sure why you need to add enum epoll_item_state > > along with expensive atomic ops to compute the state. Wouldn't it be > > enough to know in which queue the nodes are located ? If need be, you > > could add new queues, e.g. one per state. So instead of marking states, > > you would simply re-enqueue the nodes into per-state queues. This would > > simplify zombie management and save a couple of brains in the process. ;-) > > Is there a quick way to know which queue the node is located? Unfortunately, no. We don't do such "tagging", so you'd have to iterate on all list items to find this info in the worse case. Thanks, Mathieu -- Mathieu Desnoyers EfficiOS Inc. http://www.efficios.com -- 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