netdev - Re: [PATCH v2] l2tp: use per-cpu variables for u64

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: <20120627.152153.75362722222316911.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:	Wed, 27 Jun 2012 15:21:53 -0700 (PDT)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	eric.dumazet@...il.com
Cc:	rick.jones2@...com, tparkin@...alix.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	David.Laight@...LAB.COM, jchapman@...alix.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] l2tp: use per-cpu variables for u64_stats updates

From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2012 22:39:01 +0200

> In 2012 or 2013, 64bits kernels are the norm, and 32bit the exception.
> 
> Should we add complex code to l2tp just for being able to run it on
> 32bit kernels with 64bit stats ?
> 
> Considering this code is buggy at the v1 & v2, I am really wondering.
> 
> All sane SNMP applications are ready to cope with 32bits counters
> wrapping.
> 
> Machines that could wrap the 32bit counter several times per second are
> probably running on 64bit kernels.
> 
> Also percpu stats are overkill unless a device is really meant to be
> used in // by many cpus.

I agree with Eric on all counts.
--
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