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  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:	Mon, 6 Oct 2014 09:54:14 +0200 (CEST)
From:	Thomas Gleixner <>
To:	Eric Dumazet <>
cc:	Christoph Lameter <>,
	Richard Cochran <>,
Subject: Re: Why do we still have 32 bit counters? Interrupt counters overflow
 within 50 days

On Sun, 5 Oct 2014, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> On Sun, 2014-10-05 at 23:49 +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > Whats so hard about 64bit counters on 32bit machines?
> Not hard, but not trivial either.
> > 
> > > expensive to handle in particular because these counters are used in
> > > performance critical hotpaths.
> > 
> > The expensive overhead is a single "adcl" instruction.
> > 
> Assuming a reader do not care of reading garbage yes, while carry is not
> yet propagated.

Readers and writers are serialized via desc->lock.


To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists