linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] rbtree: avoid generating code twice for the cached versions

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]

Message-ID: <20190628165642.r754xozttawmg5yh@linux-r8p5>
Date:   Fri, 28 Jun 2019 09:56:42 -0700
From:   Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net>
To:     Michel Lespinasse <walken@...gle.com>
Cc:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] rbtree: avoid generating code twice for the cached
 versions

On Thu, 27 Jun 2019, Michel Lespinasse wrote:

>As was already noted in rbtree.h, the logic to cache rb_first (or rb_last)
>can easily be implemented externally to the core rbtree api.
>
>Change the implementation to do just that. Previously the update of
>rb_leftmost was wired deeper into the implemntation, but there were
>some disadvantages to that - mostly, lib/rbtree.c had separate
>instantiations for rb_insert_color() vs rb_insert_color_cached(), as well
>as rb_erase() vs rb_erase_cached(), which were doing exactly the same
>thing save for the rb_leftmost update at the start of either function.

I think this makes sense, and is more along the lines of the augmented
cached doing the static inline instead of separate instantiations of the
calls.

>Change-Id: I0cb62be774fc0138b81188e6ae81d5f1da64578d
what is this?

>Signed-off-by: Michel Lespinasse <walken@...gle.com>

Acked-by: Davidlohr Bueso <dbueso@...e.de>

Thanks!