linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 1/3] kernel/resource: clean up and optimize iomem_is

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <16141669368a89f8304b1777094e982942d51bba.camel@intel.com>
Date:   Wed, 1 Sep 2021 19:43:18 +0000
From:   "Williams, Dan J" <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
To:     "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "david@...hat.com" <david@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/3] kernel/resource: clean up and optimize
 iomem_is_exclusive()

On Tue, 2021-08-31 at 22:21 +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> We end up traversing subtrees of ranges we are not interested in; let's
> optimize this case, skipping such subtrees, cleaning up the function a bit.
> 
> Signed-off-by: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
> ---
>  kernel/resource.c | 25 ++++++++++++++++++++-----
>  1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)

That diffstat does not come across as "cleanup", and the skip_children
flag changing values mid-iteration feels tricky. Is there a win here,
the same number of entries still need to be accessed, right?

BTW, I had to pull this from lore to reply to it, looks like the
intended Cc's were missing?