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
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 16 May 2018 14:56:11 -0400 (EDT) From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> To: Jose.Abreu@...opsys.com Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, Joao.Pinto@...opsys.com, Vitor.Soares@...opsys.com, peppe.cavallaro@...com, alexandre.torgue@...com Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 net-next 00/12] net: stmmac: Clean-up and tune-up From: Jose Abreu <Jose.Abreu@...opsys.com> Date: Wed, 16 May 2018 13:50:42 +0100 > David raised some rightfull constrains about the use of indirect callbacks in > the code. I did iperf tests with and without patches 3-12 and the performance > remained equal. I guess for 1Gb/s and because my setup has a powerfull > processor these patches don't affect the performance. Does your cpu need Spectre v1 and v2 workarounds which cause indirect calls to be extremely expensive? That's the case I'm worried about.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists