linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] char/mem: only use {read,write}_iter, not the old {read,write} functions

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: <Yoeylxfbl9hDI/jE@zx2c4.com>
Date:   Fri, 20 May 2022 17:24:07 +0200
From:   "Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason@...c4.com>
To:     Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
Cc:     gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] char/mem: only use {read,write}_iter, not the old
 {read,write} functions

Hi Al,

On Fri, May 20, 2022 at 03:09:19PM +0000, 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 ;-/

Huh, yea, I lose around 1 GiB/s of perf on my machine sending /dev/zero
into /dev/null.

Jason