linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 6/9] 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, 9 Apr 2015 16:09:07 +0800
From:	Lai Jiangshan <laijs@...fujitsu.com>
To:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, <mingo@...nel.org>,
	<rusty@...tcorp.com.au>, <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
	<oleg@...hat.com>, <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	<torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
CC:	<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 v4 6/9] rbtree: Implement generic latch_tree

On 04/09/2015 12:48 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:

> +
> +struct latch_tree_node {
> +	/*
> +	 * Because we have an array of two entries in struct latch_tree_nodes
> +	 * it's not possible to use container_of() to get back to the
> +	 * encapsulating structure; therefore we have to put in a back pointer.
> +	 */
> +	void		*priv;
> +	struct rb_node	node;
> +};

I don't think @priv is strictly needed. It is possible to use container_of()
to go back. @priv is even not used in this file (except the initialization).

First, we can use container_of() to find encapsulating structure from the
struct latch_tree_nodeS.

Second, we can add a @idx to __lt_insert() and __lt_find(), thus we can
find the encapsulating latch_tree_nodes from rb_node or latch_tree_node.
and struct latch_tree_ops uses latch_tree_nodes instead.

Did I miss anything? If the @priv is possible to be removed, removing it will
simplify this file but it may add a little more code in the module.c where
the ltn_core&ltn_init can't share the same ->less() and ->comp() after.

If you do remove @priv, please also use rb_node instead of old latch_tree_node
and rename old latch_tree_nodes to latch_tree_node.

--
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/