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  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
 
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:	Fri, 20 Nov 2015 20:18:20 +0000
From:	Jon Maloy <jon.maloy@...csson.com>
To:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
CC:	"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	"paul.gortmaker@...driver.com" <paul.gortmaker@...driver.com>,
	"parthasarathy.xx.bhuvaragan@...csson.com" 
	<parthasarathy.xx.bhuvaragan@...csson.com>,
	Richard Alpe <richard.alpe@...csson.com>,
	Ying Xue <ying.xue@...driver.com>,
	"maloy@...jonn.com" <maloy@...jonn.com>,
	"tipc-discussion@...ts.sourceforge.net" 
	<tipc-discussion@...ts.sourceforge.net>
Subject: RE: [PATCH net-next 0/8] tipc: some cleanups and improvements



> -----Original Message-----
> From: David Miller [mailto:davem@...emloft.net]
> Sent: Friday, 20 November, 2015 14:07
> To: Jon Maloy
> Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org; paul.gortmaker@...driver.com;
> parthasarathy.xx.bhuvaragan@...csson.com; Richard Alpe; Ying Xue;
> maloy@...jonn.com; tipc-discussion@...ts.sourceforge.net
> Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 0/8] tipc: some cleanups and improvements
> 
> From: Jon Maloy <jon.maloy@...csson.com>
> Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2015 14:30:38 -0500
> 
> > This series mostly contains cleanups and cosmetic code changes.
> > The only real functional change is in #4 and #5, where we change the
> > locking structure for nodes and links in order to permit full
> > concurrency between links working in parallel on different interfaces.
> > Since the groundwork for this has been done in previous commit series,
> > this change constitutes only the final, small step to achieve that goal.
> 
> Series applied, thanks.
> 
> Generally speaking, rwlock usage really never buys you anything significant.
> Therefore in the long run I think a single spinlock plus RCU is going to be
> much better for per-node locking in TIPC.

Thank you for the feedback.  My own benchmarking has already confirmed
what you are stating.  I am currently looking at how to convert it to RCU.

///jon

--
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

Powered by blists - more mailing lists