linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] mm: create a separate slab for page->ptl allocation

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]

Date:	Tue, 5 Nov 2013 16:43:51 -0800
From:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@...temov.name>
Cc:	"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: create a separate slab for page->ptl allocation

On Wed, 6 Nov 2013 01:13:11 +0200 "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@...temov.name> wrote:

> > Really the function shouldn't exist in this case.  It is __init so the
> > sin is not terrible, but can this be arranged?
> 
> I would like to get rid of __ptlock_alloc()/__ptlock_free() too, but I
> don't see a way within C: we need to know sizeof(spinlock_t) on
> preprocessor stage.
> 
> We can have a hack on kbuild level: write small helper program to find out
> sizeof(spinlock_t) before start building and turn it into define.
> But it's overkill from my POV. And cross-compilation will be a fun.

Yes, it doesn't seem worth the fuss.  The compiler will remove all this
code anyway, so for example ptlock_cache_init() becomes an empty function.
--
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/