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]
Date:   Fri, 20 May 2022 09:11:39 -0600
From:   Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
To:     Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
        "Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason@...c4.com>
Cc:     gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] char/mem: only use {read,write}_iter, not the old
 {read,write} functions

On 5/20/22 9:09 AM, Al Viro wrote:
> On Fri, May 20, 2022 at 03:50:30PM +0200, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote:
>> Currently mem.c implements both the {read,write}_iter functions and the
>> {read,write} functions. But with {read,write} going away at some point
>> in the future,
> 
> Not likely to happen, unfortunately.
> 
>> and most kernel code made to prefer {read,write}_iter,
>> there's no point in keeping around the old code.
> 
> Profile and you'll see ;-/

Weren't you working on bits to get us to performance parity there?
What's the status of that?

It really is an unfortunate situation we're currently in with two
methods for either read or write, with one being greatly preferred as we
can pass in non-file associated state (like IOCB_NOWAIT, etc) but the
older variant being a bit faster. It lives us in a bad place, imho.

-- 
Jens Axboe

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ