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: Sat, 27 Aug 2022 10:27:46 +0800 From: Miaohe Lin <linmiaohe@...wei.com> To: Muchun Song <muchun.song@...ux.dev> CC: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, <mike.kravetz@...cle.com>, Muchun Song <songmuchun@...edance.com>, <linux-mm@...ck.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH 03/10] hugetlb: Use LIST_HEAD() to define a list head On 2022/8/27 9:47, Muchun Song wrote: > > >> On Aug 26, 2022, at 17:24, Miaohe Lin <linmiaohe@...wei.com> wrote: >> >> We can avoid unneeded WRITE_ONCE() overhead by using LIST_HEAD() to define >> a list head. > > IIUC, the overhead doesn’t change. Right? I think the overhead is changed. LIST_HEAD is initialized without using WRITE_ONCE(): #define LIST_HEAD_INIT(name) { &(name), &(name) } #define LIST_HEAD(name) \ struct list_head name = LIST_HEAD_INIT(name) while INIT_LIST_HEAD has: static inline void INIT_LIST_HEAD(struct list_head *list) { WRITE_ONCE(list->next, list); WRITE_ONCE(list->prev, list); } Or am I miss something? > > I’m fine with your changes. > > Reviewed-by: Muchun Song <songmuchun@...edance.com> Many thanks for your review and comment. :) Thanks, Miaohe Lin
Powered by blists - more mailing lists