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
| ||
|
Date: Sun, 17 Sep 2017 17:00:12 +0200
From: Thomas Meyer <thomas@...3r.de>
To: Jon Maloy <jon.maloy@...csson.com>
Cc: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>, Ying Xue <ying.xue@...driver.com>,
"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"tipc-discussion@...ts.sourceforge.net"
<tipc-discussion@...ts.sourceforge.net>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2] tipc: Use bsearch library function
> Am 16.09.2017 um 15:20 schrieb Jon Maloy <jon.maloy@...csson.com>.
>>
>> What part of "very time critical" have you verified and benchmarked as
>> inconsequential?
>>
>> Please post your results.
>
> I agree with Joe here. This change does not simplify anything, it does not reduce the amount of code, plus that it introduce an unnecessary outline call in a place where we have every reason to let the compiler do its optimization job properly.
Hi,
Okay, should I prepare some performance numbers or do we NAK this change?
What about the other binary search implementation in the same file? Should I try to convert it it will it get NAKed for performance reasons too?
With kind regards
Thomas
Download attachment "smime.p7s" of type "application/pkcs7-signature" (5334 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists