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  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, 18 May 2007 15:21:33 +0200
From:	Andi Kleen <>
To:	Anton Blanchard <>
Cc:	Hugh Dickins <>,
	Christoph Lameter <>,
	Andrew Morton <>,
	Badari Pulavarty <>,,
	lkml <>,
Subject: Re: select(0, ..) is valid ?

On Wednesday 16 May 2007 17:37, Anton Blanchard wrote:
> Hi Hugh,
> > It's interesting that compat_core_sys_select() shows this kmalloc(0)
> > failure but core_sys_select() does not.  That's because core_sys_select()
> > avoids kmalloc by using a buffer on the stack for small allocations (and
> > 0 sure is small).  Shouldn't compat_core_sys_select() do just the same?
> > Or is SLUB going to be so efficient that doing so is a waste of time?
> Nice catch, the original optimisation from Andi is:
> And I think it makes sense for the compat code to do it too.

Yes agreed. I just forgot the copy'n'pasted code when doing the original

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists