linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH net-next v5 01/21] lib/bitmap: add bitmap

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: Thu, 01 Feb 2024 15:02:50 +0100
From: "Arnd Bergmann" <arnd@...db.de>
To: "Alexander Potapenko" <glider@...gle.com>
Cc: "Alexander Lobakin" <aleksander.lobakin@...el.com>,
 "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
 "Eric Dumazet" <edumazet@...gle.com>, "Jakub Kicinski" <kuba@...nel.org>,
 "Paolo Abeni" <pabeni@...hat.com>,
 "Michal Swiatkowski" <michal.swiatkowski@...ux.intel.com>,
 "Marcin Szycik" <marcin.szycik@...ux.intel.com>,
 "Wojciech Drewek" <wojciech.drewek@...el.com>,
 "Yury Norov" <yury.norov@...il.com>, "Andy Shevchenko" <andy@...nel.org>,
 "Rasmus Villemoes" <linux@...musvillemoes.dk>,
 "Jiri Pirko" <jiri@...nulli.us>, "Ido Schimmel" <idosch@...dia.com>,
 "Przemek Kitszel" <przemyslaw.kitszel@...el.com>,
 "Simon Horman" <horms@...nel.org>, linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org,
 dm-devel@...hat.com, ntfs3@...ts.linux.dev, linux-s390@...r.kernel.org,
 "intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org" <intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org>,
 Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 "Syed Nayyar Waris" <syednwaris@...il.com>,
 "William Breathitt Gray" <william.gray@...aro.org>,
 "Andy Shevchenko" <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v5 01/21] lib/bitmap: add bitmap_{read,write}()

On Thu, Feb 1, 2024, at 14:45, Alexander Potapenko wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 1, 2024 at 2:23 PM Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de> wrote:
>> On Thu, Feb 1, 2024, at 13:21, Alexander Lobakin wrote:
>>
>> As far as I can tell, the header ends up being included
>> indirectly almost everywhere, so just parsing these functions
>> likey adds not just dependencies but also compile time.
>>
>
> Removing particular functions from a header to reduce compilation time
> does not really scale.
> Do we know this case has a noticeable impact on the compilation time?
> If yes, maybe we need to tackle this problem in a different way (e.g.
> reduce the number of dependencies on it)?

Cleaning up the header dependencies is definitely possible in
theory, and there are other places we could start this, but
it's also a multi-year effort that several people have tried
without much success.

All I'm asking here is to not make it worse by adding this
one without need. If the function is not normally inlined
anyway, there is no benefit to having it in the header.

      Arnd