linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/3] io

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: <8ad4a84e-9796-6431-c73e-1d34eed0b0fb@gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 6 Feb 2020 12:51:35 +0300
From:   Pavel Begunkov <asml.silence@...il.com>
To:     Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>, io-uring@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] io_uring: clean wq path

On 2/6/2020 5:50 AM, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On 2/5/20 3:29 PM, Pavel Begunkov wrote:
>> On 05/02/2020 22:07, Pavel Begunkov wrote:
>>> This is the first series of shaving some overhead for wq-offloading.
>>> The 1st removes extra allocations, and the 3rd req->refs abusing.
>>
>> Rechecked a couple of assumptions, this patchset is messed up.
>> Drop it for now.
> 
> OK, will do, haven't had time to look at it yet anyway.

Sorry for the fuss. I'll return to it later.

> 
> Are you going to do the ->has_user removal? We should just do that
> separately first.
Yes. I've spotted a few bugs, so I'm going to patch them first with
merging/backporting in mind, and then deal with ->has_user. IMO, this
order makes more sense.

-- 
Pavel Begunkov