linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] idr: Document ida tree sections

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: <20130813235947.GL28996@mtj.dyndns.org>
Date:	Tue, 13 Aug 2013 19:59:47 -0400
From:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To:	Kent Overstreet <kmo@...erainc.com>
Cc:	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
	Fengguang Wu <fengguang.wu@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] idr: Document ida tree sections

Hey, Kent.

On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 04:51:33PM -0700, Kent Overstreet wrote:
> Should probably be almost as good, yeah... in theory, but the space
> efficiency still isn't going to be as good, and it'll probably be more
> code... and at this point I really just don't want to futz with it more.
> At this point unless there's something really wrong with this code I
> just want to move onto something else :P

I think it probably would be okay in most cases but don't feel
confident about acking as it's making trade-offs which are unnecessary
and unusual.  So, ummm, I really don't know.  Maybe it's better enough
than what we have now but at the same time if you want to reimplement
the whole thing you should be persistent / reliable enough to see it
through this time around too, right?

Thanks.

-- 
tejun
--
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/