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: Fri, 1 May 2020 16:03:59 -0700 From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org> To: "Uladzislau Rezki (Sony)" <urezki@...il.com> Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, linux-mm@...ck.org, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, "Theodore Y . Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>, Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>, Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>, RCU <rcu@...r.kernel.org>, Oleksiy Avramchenko <oleksiy.avramchenko@...ymobile.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH 21/24] rcu/tiny: move kvfree_call_rcu() out of header On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 10:59:00PM +0200, Uladzislau Rezki (Sony) wrote: > Move inlined kvfree_call_rcu() function out of the > header file. This step is a preparation for head-less > support. > > Reviewed-by: Joel Fernandes (Google) <joel@...lfernandes.org> > Signed-off-by: Uladzislau Rezki (Sony) <urezki@...il.com> > --- > include/linux/rcutiny.h | 6 +----- > kernel/rcu/tiny.c | 6 ++++++ > 2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/include/linux/rcutiny.h b/include/linux/rcutiny.h > index 0c6315c4a0fe..7eb66909ae1b 100644 > --- a/include/linux/rcutiny.h > +++ b/include/linux/rcutiny.h > @@ -34,11 +34,7 @@ static inline void synchronize_rcu_expedited(void) > synchronize_rcu(); > } > > -static inline void kvfree_call_rcu(struct rcu_head *head, rcu_callback_t func) > -{ > - call_rcu(head, func); > -} > - > +void kvfree_call_rcu(struct rcu_head *head, rcu_callback_t func); > void rcu_qs(void); > > static inline void rcu_softirq_qs(void) > diff --git a/kernel/rcu/tiny.c b/kernel/rcu/tiny.c > index aa897c3f2e92..508c82faa45c 100644 > --- a/kernel/rcu/tiny.c > +++ b/kernel/rcu/tiny.c > @@ -177,6 +177,12 @@ void call_rcu(struct rcu_head *head, rcu_callback_t func) > } > EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(call_rcu); > > +void kvfree_call_rcu(struct rcu_head *head, rcu_callback_t func) > +{ > + call_rcu(head, func); > +} > +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(kvfree_call_rcu); This increases the size of Tiny RCU. Plus in Tiny RCU, the overhead of synchronize_rcu() is exactly zero. So why not make the single-argument kvfree_call_rcu() just unconditionally do synchronize_rcu() followed by kvfree() or whatever? That should go just fine into the header file. Thanx, Paul > void __init rcu_init(void) > { > open_softirq(RCU_SOFTIRQ, rcu_process_callbacks); > -- > 2.20.1 >
Powered by blists - more mailing lists