netdev - Re: 2.6.23-rc1: BUG_ON in kmap_atomic

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 24 Jul 2007 12:48:13 -0700 (PDT)
From:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Adrian Bunk <bunk@...sta.de>
cc:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: 2.6.23-rc1: BUG_ON in kmap_atomic_prot()

On Tue, 24 Jul 2007, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> 
> > But do we 
> > care so much that it's worth inlining something like buffered_rmqueue()? 
> >...
> 
> Where is the problem with having buffered_rmqueue() inlined?

In this case, it was a pain to just even try to find the call chain, or 
read the asm.

I would encourage lots of kernel hackers to read the assembler code gcc 
generates. I suspect people being aware of code generation issues (and 
writing their code with that in mind) is a *much* bigger performance 
impact than gcc inlining random functions.

So maybe I'm old-fashioned and crazy, but "readability of the asm result" 
actually is a worthwhile goal. Not because we care directly, but because 
I'd like to encourage people to do it, due to the *indirect* benefits.

		Linus
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html