netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next] af_unix: speedup /proc/net/unix

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]

Date:	Sat, 09 Jun 2012 09:42:07 +0400
From:	Michael Tokarev <mjt@....msk.ru>
To:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
CC:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
	netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	Steven Whitehouse <swhiteho@...hat.com>,
	Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@...allels.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] af_unix: speedup /proc/net/unix

On 08.06.2012 19:03, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> From: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
> 
> /proc/net/unix has quadratic behavior, and can hold unix_table_lock for
> a while if high number of unix sockets are alive. (90 ms for 200k
> sockets...)

Two comments, nitpicking...

[]
>  struct unix_iter_state {
>  	struct seq_net_private p;
> -	int i;
>  };

Can't seq_net_private be used directly?

> +static struct sock *unix_next_socket(struct seq_file *seq,
> +				     struct sock *sk,
> +				     loff_t *pos)
> +{
....
>  }
>  
>  static void *unix_seq_next(struct seq_file *seq, void *v, loff_t *pos)
>  {
> +	return unix_next_socket(seq, v, pos);
>  }

Why unix_seq_next() is needed?  Can't unix_next_socket() be used directly instead?

Thanks,

/mjt
--
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