linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 6/6] arch, x86: pmem api for ensuring durability of persistent memory updates

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:	Wed, 17 Jun 2015 07:54:14 -0700
From:	Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
To:	Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
Cc:	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Ross Zwisler <ross.zwisler@...ux.intel.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Juergen Gross <jgross@...e.com>, X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>,
	"Kani, Toshimitsu" <toshi.kani@...com>,
	"linux-nvdimm@...ts.01.org" <linux-nvdimm@...ts.01.org>,
	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
	Luis Rodriguez <mcgrof@...e.com>,
	Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Stefan Bader <stefan.bader@...onical.com>,
	Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
	Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
	Ralf Baechle <ralf@...ux-mips.org>,
	Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <hmh@....eng.br>,
	mpe@...erman.id.au, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
	Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 6/6] arch, x86: pmem api for ensuring durability of
 persistent memory updates

On Wed, Jun 17, 2015 at 4:31 AM, Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de> wrote:
> This mess with arch_ methods and an ops vecor is almost unreadable.
>
> What's the problem with having something like:
>
> pmem_foo()
> {
>         if (arch_has_pmem)              // or sync_pmem
>                 arch_pmem_foo();
>         generic_pmem_foo();
> }
>
> This adds a branch at runtime, but that shoudn't really be any slower
> than an indirect call on architectures that matter.

No doubt it's premature optimization, but it bothered me that we'll
end up calling cpuid perhaps multiple times every i/o.  If it's just a
readability concern I could wrap it in helpers.  Getting it upstream
is my primary concern at this point so I have no strong attachment to
the indirect calls if that's all that is preventing an ack.
--
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/