linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 03/10] slab: move up code to get kmem_cache_node in free

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20140508004452.27923.qmail@ns.horizon.com>
Date:	7 May 2014 20:44:52 -0400
From:	"George Spelvin" <linux@...izon.com>
To:	linux@...izon.com, rientjes@...gle.com
Cc:	cl@...ux.com, iamjoonsoo.kim@....com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 03/10] slab: move up code to get kmem_cache_node in free_block()

> A function called clear_obj_pfmemalloc() doesn't indicate it's returning 
> anything, I think the vast majority of people would believe that it 
> returns void just as it does.  There's no complier generated code 
> optimization with this patch and

> I'm not sure it's even correct since 
> you're now clearing after doing recheck_pfmemalloc_active().

I thought this through before rearranging the code.
recheck_pfmemalloc_active() checks global lists, but __ac_get_obj()
is doing clear_obj_pfmemalloc on a local variable.

I think it does make sense to remove the pointless "return;" in 
set_obj_pfmemalloc(), however.  Not sure it's worth asking someone to 
merge it, though.

--
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/