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: <0577266edb9440acb082c9e02c0a73b9@AcuMS.aculab.com>
Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2024 14:16:51 +0000
From: David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>
To: 'Julian Vetter' <jvetter@...rayinc.com>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>, Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
	"Guo Ren" <guoren@...nel.org>, Huacai Chen <chenhuacai@...nel.org>, WANG
 Xuerui <kernel@...0n.name>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, "Geert
 Uytterhoeven" <geert@...ux-m68k.org>, Richard Henderson
	<richard.henderson@...aro.org>, Niklas Schnelle <schnelle@...ux.ibm.com>,
	Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.com>, Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@...tlin.com>,
	Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>, Christoph Hellwig
	<hch@...radead.org>
CC: "linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
	<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org"
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, "linux-csky@...r.kernel.org"
	<linux-csky@...r.kernel.org>, "loongarch@...ts.linux.dev"
	<loongarch@...ts.linux.dev>, "linux-arch@...r.kernel.org"
	<linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>, Yann Sionneau <ysionneau@...rayinc.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v10 0/4] Replace fallback for IO memcpy and IO memset

From: Julian Vetter
> Sent: 21 October 2024 14:32
> 
> Thank you again for your remarks Arnd and Christoph! I have updated the
> patchset, and placed the functions directly in asm-generic/io.h. I have
> dropped the libs/iomem_copy.c and have updated/clarified the commit
> message in the first patch.

Apart from build 'issues' what is the justification for inlining
these functions?

They are quite large for inlining and some drivers could easily
call them many times.

The I/O cycles themselves are likely to be slow enough that
the cost of a function call is pretty much likely to be noise.

	David

-
Registered Address Lakeside, Bramley Road, Mount Farm, Milton Keynes, MK1 1PT, UK
Registration No: 1397386 (Wales)

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ