netdev - RE: [PATCH net 2/2] rhashtable: remove indirection for grow/shrink decision functions

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: <063D6719AE5E284EB5DD2968C1650D6D1CAED36D@AcuExch.aculab.com>
Date:	Wed, 25 Feb 2015 15:41:28 +0000
From:	David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>
To:	'Daniel Borkmann' <daniel@...earbox.net>,
	"davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>
CC:	"tgraf@...g.ch" <tgraf@...g.ch>,
	"pablo@...filter.org" <pablo@...filter.org>,
	"johunt@...mai.com" <johunt@...mai.com>,
	"kaber@...sh.net" <kaber@...sh.net>,
	"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH net 2/2] rhashtable: remove indirection for grow/shrink
 decision functions

From: Daniel Borkmann
> Currently, all real users of rhashtable default their grow and shrink
> decision functions to rht_grow_above_75() and rht_shrink_below_30(),
> so that there's currently no need to have this explicitly selectable.
> 
> It can/should be generic and private inside rhashtable until a real
> use case pops up. Since we can make this private, we'll save us this
> additional indirection layer and can improve insertion/deletion time
> as well.
...
> +static bool rht_grow_above_75(const struct rhashtable *ht, size_t new_size)
>  {
>  	/* Expand table when exceeding 75% load */
>  	return atomic_read(&ht->nelems) > (new_size / 4 * 3) &&
>  	       (!ht->p.max_shift || atomic_read(&ht->shift) < ht->p.max_shift);
>  }

Why not cache the 'number of items before we need to expand' value
after each expansion, setting it to 'infinite' when expansion is disabled.
Then the above check is a simple comparison.
You probably don't even need an atomic_read() - provided something is
double checked once the first test determines that an expansion is needed.

	David

--
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