linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 6/8] rbtree: Implement generic latch

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:	Thu, 19 Mar 2015 08:25:02 +0100
From:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	mingo@...nel.org, rusty@...tcorp.com.au,
	mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com, oleg@...hat.com,
	paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, andi@...stfloor.org,
	rostedt@...dmis.org, tglx@...utronix.de,
	Michel Lespinasse <walken@...gle.com>,
	Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
	David Woodhouse <David.Woodhouse@...el.com>,
	Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/8] rbtree: Implement generic latch_tree

On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 10:14:46PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Wed, 18 Mar 2015 14:36:32 +0100 Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
> 
> >  include/linux/rbtree_latch.h |  223 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 
> Did it really need to all be inlined?

Without that you get actual function calls to the less() and comp()
operators. This way GCC can inline the lot even though its function
pointers.

The typical RB tree user open-codes all this every single time.

> How much of this code is unneeded on uniprocessor?

None, UP has NMIs too.
--
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/