netdev - Re: [Bug 106241] New: shutdown(3)/close(3) behaviour is incorrect for sockets in accept(3)

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: <CA+55aFyoA5sXQvFDavNa7cGkRevunmtPe8F8-_tZ9-826qfkgw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Fri, 30 Oct 2015 14:23:54 -0700
From:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
Cc:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Stephen Hemminger <stephen@...workplumber.org>,
	Network Development <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
	linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [Bug 106241] New: shutdown(3)/close(3) behaviour is incorrect for
 sockets in accept(3)

On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 2:02 PM, Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk> wrote:
>
> Your variant has 1:64 ratio; obviously better than now, but we can actually
> do 1:bits-per-cacheline quite easily.

Ok, but in that case you end up needing a counter for each cacheline
too (to count how many bits, in order to know when to say "cacheline
is entirely full").

Because otherwise you'll end up having to check the whole cacheline
(rather than check just one word, or check the "bit counter") when you
set a bit.

So I suspect a "bitmap of full words" ends up being much simpler.  But
hey, if you can make your more complex thing work, go right ahead.

               Linus
--
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