linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 6/8] idr: avoid ping-pong

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: <20140418171717.GE23576@htj.dyndns.org>
Date:	Fri, 18 Apr 2014 13:17:17 -0400
From:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To:	Lai Jiangshan <laijs@...fujitsu.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Jean Delvare <jdelvare@...e.de>,
	Monam Agarwal <monamagarwal123@...il.com>,
	Jeff Layton <jlayton@...hat.com>,
	Andreas Gruenbacher <agruen@...bit.com>,
	Stephen Hemminger <stephen@...workplumber.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/8] idr: avoid ping-pong

On Fri, Apr 18, 2014 at 08:49:53PM +0800, Lai Jiangshan wrote:
> The ida callers always calls ida_pre_get() before ida_get_new*().
> ida_pre_get() will do layer allocation, and ida_get_new*() will do layer removal.
> 
> It causes an unneeded ping-pong. The speculative layer removal in
> ida_get_new*() can't result expected optimization.
> 
> So we remove the unneeded layer removal in ida_get_new*().

But the as comment says, ida doesn't want to keep extra layers around
as it wants to keep its memory footprint minimal.  I think the right
thing to do is implementing ida_preload() which is simliar to
idr_preload() and do away with per-ida layer cache.

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/