| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20150327120415.15640e4b@gandalf.local.home> Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2015 12:04:15 -0400 From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org> To: "Suresh E. Warrier" <warrier@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH] ring-buffer: More precise time stamps for nested writes On Fri, 27 Mar 2015 00:38:43 -0500 "Suresh E. Warrier" <warrier@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote: > > But for now, what can be done is to have > > a flag that is set that will implement this or not. Using > > static_branch() to implement it such that when its off it has no effect. > > > > Are you recommending that for now I use a static_branch() instead > of a CONFIG option to fix this? I could do that but the resulting > code will either be messier to read (with several if condition checks) > or will require some duplication of code. My assumption is that the > new CONFIG option when disabled should have negligible impact since > the compiler inlines the functions. It can be done cleanly if you encapsulate it properly. Too bad I'm not going on any trips soon. This is a project I would work on on the plane. -- Steve -- 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists