netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next] mlx4: do not use rwlock in fast path

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: <540a3fdc-0fc1-6da0-18cf-591e00566001@gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 15 Feb 2017 11:51:23 +0200
From:   Tariq Toukan <ttoukan.linux@...il.com>
To:     David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, eric.dumazet@...il.com
Cc:     netdev@...r.kernel.org, tariqt@...lanox.com,
        sbohrer@...advisors.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] mlx4: do not use rwlock in fast path



On 14/02/2017 6:28 PM, David Miller wrote:
> From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
> Date: Thu, 09 Feb 2017 09:10:04 -0800
>
>> From: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
>>
>> Using a reader-writer lock in fast path is silly, when we can
>> instead use RCU or a seqlock.
>>
>> For mlx4 hwstamp clock, a seqlock is the way to go, removing
>> two atomic operations and false sharing.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
>> Cc: Tariq Toukan <tariqt@...lanox.com>
> Tariq or someone else at Mellanox please review, this patch has been
> rotting for 5 days in patchwork.
>
> Thank you.
Reviewed-by: Tariq Toukan <tariqt@...lanox.com>
Thanks.