netdev - Re: [PATCH 2/2] udp: RCU handling for Unicast packets.

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: <1225364660.7803.61.camel@twins>
Date:	Thu, 30 Oct 2008 12:04:20 +0100
From:	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
To:	Eric Dumazet <dada1@...mosbay.com>
Cc:	paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, Corey Minyard <minyard@....org>,
	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, shemminger@...tta.com,
	benny+usenet@...rsen.dk, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org>,
	johnpol@....mipt.ru, Christian Bell <christian@...i.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] udp: RCU handling for Unicast packets.

On Wed, 2008-10-29 at 21:00 +0100, Eric Dumazet wrote:

> 
> Hum... Another way of handling all those cases and avoid memory barriers
> would be to have different "NULL" pointers.
> 
> Each hash chain should have a unique "NULL" pointer (in the case of UDP, it
> can be the 128 values : [ (void*)0 .. (void *)127 ]

Why not use the bucket pointer as terminating condition?

Because all you really need is a pointer that is specific per bucket,
and not a valid element, right?


--
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