netdev - Re: [PATCH 3/4] xfrm: remove policy lock when accessing policy->walk.dead

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]

Message-Id: <20100331.135735.00480230.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:	Wed, 31 Mar 2010 13:57:35 -0700 (PDT)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	herbert@...dor.apana.org.au
Cc:	hadi@...erus.ca, timo.teras@....fi, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] xfrm: remove policy lock when accessing
 policy->walk.dead

From: Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
Date: Wed, 31 Mar 2010 22:15:25 +0800

> Dave can keep or revert this as he likes.

Herbert, if it doesn't break anything, I feel the gains are very
worthwhile.

When we have a breakage report, I will undo this or fix it
immediately.  Until then, we have to be cognizant of what positives we
get out of this.

Have you actually tried to monitor the IPSEC netlink socket events
when a daemon is running?  It's way too painful before Jamal's
changes, and we already emit way too many semantically empty events in
netlink.

Minimization of the noise is a good thing, if it can legally be done,
which I believe is the case here.  And this applies to pfkey events
too, because processing those is even more expensive on the
application side.
--
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