linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/4] IB/mthca: Cleanup and optimize a few bitmap operation

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20211125173039.GA499138@nvidia.com>
Date:   Thu, 25 Nov 2021 13:30:39 -0400
From:   Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>
To:     Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@...adoo.fr>
Cc:     dledford@...hat.com, linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] IB/mthca: Cleanup and optimize a few bitmap operation

On Wed, Nov 24, 2021 at 09:40:09PM +0100, Christophe JAILLET wrote:
> Patch 1 and 2 are just cleanups that uses 'bitmap_zalloc()' and 'bitmap_set()'
> instead of hand-writing these functions.
> 
> Patch 3 and 4 are more questionable. They replace calls to '[set|clear]_bit()'
> by their non-atomic '__[set|clear]_bit()' alternatives.
> In both files, it looks safe to do so because accesses to the corresponding
> bitmaps are protected by spinlocks.
> However, these patches are compile tested only. It not sure it worth changing the
> code just for saving a few atomic operations.
> So review, test and apply only if it make sense.
> 
> Christophe JAILLET (4):
>   IB/mthca: Use bitmap_zalloc() when applicable
>   IB/mthca: Use bitmap_set() when applicable
>   IB/mthca: Use non-atomic bitmap functions when possible in
>     'mthca_allocator.c'
>   IB/mthca: Use non-atomic bitmap functions when possible in
>     'mthca_mr.c'

Applied to for-next, thanks

Jason