netdev - Re: [PATCH 4/7] cxgb4: Add packet queues and packet DMA code

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: <20100227.014839.226753616.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:	Sat, 27 Feb 2010 01:48:39 -0800 (PST)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	dm@...lsio.com
Cc:	shemminger@...tta.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/7] cxgb4: Add packet queues and packet DMA code

From: "Dimitrios Michailidis" <dm@...lsio.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Feb 2010 16:10:07 -0800

> I believe this function does not generate any code, the compiler
> statically figures out the result and optimizes any conditionals that
> call it.  What option do you have in mind that would tell the compiler
> if unmap is nop?

I've got better questions:

1) Why is your driver so damn special?

   If this optimization is useful, it dosn't belong privately in
   some driver, it belongs in some generic spot.

2) What configuration does this even help for?  Even bog standard x86
   and x86_64 uses IOMMUs and thus make use of the unmap address.

   I cannot think of one platform that matters where this will even
   trigger.

Get rid of this junk, please.  Because even if it's valid, it doesn't
belong privately in your driver.

--
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