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
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 5 May 2008 18:57:44 -0300 From: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...hat.com> To: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> Cc: ilpo.jarvinen@...sinki.fi, johannes@...solutions.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] [NET] warn when accounting an skb that already has a destructor Em Mon, May 05, 2008 at 12:08:11PM -0700, David Miller escreveu: > From: "Ilpo_Järvinen" <ilpo.jarvinen@...sinki.fi> > Date: Mon, 5 May 2008 12:43:25 +0300 (EEST) > > > On Mon, 5 May 2008, David Miller wrote: > > > > > From: Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net> > > > Date: Mon, 05 May 2008 09:31:15 +0200 > > > > > > > If we decide to uninline those functions for another reason (used too > > > > much, code size, ...) then we can still do that. > > > > > > Agreed. > > > > According to my measurements the size bloat of those two is > > (x86/32bit, gcc 4.1.2 redhat something): > > > > -1091 40 funcs, 89 +, 1180 -, diff: -1091 --- skb_set_owner_r > > -495 46 funcs, 70 +, 565 -, diff: -495 --- skb_set_owner_w > > That's not too bad, but adding the WARN_ON() we're discussing > will plump that up a bit, percentage wise, which is why I > said we should inline it in such a case. s/inline/uninline/g According to some long e-mail today its worth ~198 unexport patches! 8-) - Arnaldo -- 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
Powered by blists - more mailing lists