netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v3] lib/rhashtable: allow user to set the minimum shifts of shrinking

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: <54043C45.7090005@windriver.com>
Date:	Mon, 1 Sep 2014 17:28:37 +0800
From:	Ying Xue <ying.xue@...driver.com>
To:	Thomas Graf <tgraf@...g.ch>
CC:	<davem@...emloft.net>, <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
	<netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v3] lib/rhashtable: allow user to set the minimum
 shifts of shrinking

On 09/01/2014 05:03 PM, Thomas Graf wrote:
> On 08/30/14 at 02:48pm, Ying Xue wrote:
>> Although rhashtable library allows user to specify a quiet big size
>> for user's created hash table, the table may be shrunk to a
>> very small size - HASH_MIN_SIZE(4) after object is removed from
>> the table at the first time. Subsequently, even if the total amount
>> of objects saved in the table is quite lower than user's initial
>> setting in a long time, the hash table size is still dynamically
>> adjusted by rhashtable_shrink() or rhashtable_expand() each time
>> object is inserted or removed from the table. However, as
>> synchronize_rcu() has to be called when table is shrunk or
>> expanded by the two functions, we should permit user to set the
>> minimum table size through configuring the minimum number of shifts
>> according to user specific requirement, avoiding these expensive
>> actions of shrinking or expanding because of calling synchronize_rcu().
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Ying Xue <ying.xue@...driver.com>
> 
> I see the following warning when compiling:
> 
> In file included from lib/rhashtable.c:17:0:
> lib/rhashtable.c: In function ‘rhashtable_init’:
> include/linux/kernel.h:715:17: warning: comparison of distinct pointer types lacks a cast [enabled by default]
>   (void) (&_max1 == &_max2);  \
>                  ^
> lib/rhashtable.c:570:22: note: in expansion of macro ‘max’
>   params->min_shift = max(params->min_shift, ilog2(HASH_MIN_SIZE));
> 
> 

Thanks for your check.

After I made below change, the compiling warning disappears.

+       params->min_shift = max(params->min_shift,
+                               (size_t)ilog2(HASH_MIN_SIZE));
+

But when I check the patch format with scripts/checkpatch.pl, below
warning occurs:

./scripts/checkpatch.pl
0001-lib-rhashtable-allow-user-to-set-the-minimum-shifts-.patch
WARNING: max() should probably be max_t(size_t, params->min_shift,
ilog2(HASH_MIN_SIZE))
#77: FILE: lib/rhashtable.c:570:
+	params->min_shift = max(params->min_shift,
 				(size_t)ilog2(HASH_MIN_SIZE));

total: 0 errors, 1 warnings, 46 lines checked

0001-lib-rhashtable-allow-user-to-set-the-minimum-shifts-.patch has
style problems, please review.

Do you think it's worth replacing max() macro with max_t() regarding
above suggestion?

By the way, if the replacement should do, all max() macro in the
lib/rhashtable.c should be replaced as well.

Thanks,
Ying


--
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