netdev - Re: [Devel] [PATCH][NETNS] Move some code into __init section when CONFIG_NET

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: <20071008.001716.116377615.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:	Mon, 08 Oct 2007 00:17:16 -0700 (PDT)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	adobriyan@...ru
Cc:	xemul@...nvz.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org, devel@...nvz.org
Subject: Re: [Devel] [PATCH][NETNS] Move some code into __init section when
 CONFIG_NET_NS=n

From: Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...ru>
Date: Thu, 4 Oct 2007 18:02:02 +0400

> On Thu, Oct 04, 2007 at 05:54:11PM +0400, Pavel Emelyanov wrote:
> > With the net namespaces many code leaved the __init section,
> > thus making the kernel occupy more memory than it did before.
> > Since we have a config option that prohibits the namespace
> > creation, the functions that initialize/finalize some netns
> > stuff are simply not needed and can be freed after the boot.
> > 
> > Currently, this is almost not noticeable, since few calls
> > are no longer in __init, but when the namespaces will be
> > merged it will be possible to free more code. I propose to 
> > use the __net_init, __net_exit and __net_initdata "attributes"
> > for functions/variables that are not used if the CONFIG_NET_NS
> > is not set to save more space in memory.
> 
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_NET_NS
> > +#define __net_init
> > +#define __net_exit
> > +#define __net_initdata
> > +#else
> > +#define __net_init	__init
> > +#define __net_exit	__exit
> > +#define __net_initdata	__initdata
> > +#endif
> 
> Yet another set of double-underscored section annotations is the last thing
> that is needed, methinks. :)

I'm not so sure.  I think double-underscores are a powerful deterrant
for developers.  Over time folks have learned that this prefix
in an interface name means "semantics are non-trivial, use with
care" and that definitely applies to init sections.

I'm going to apply Pavel's patch, if you want to touch it up do so
as a followon patch, thanks!

-
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