netdev - Re: [net-next 4/9] i40e: detect and log info about pre-recovery mode

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Tue, 23 Jun 2020 13:40:37 -0700
From:   Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To:     "Kirsher, Jeffrey T" <jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com>
Cc:     "davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        "Kwapulinski, Piotr" <piotr.kwapulinski@...el.com>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "nhorman@...hat.com" <nhorman@...hat.com>,
        "sassmann@...hat.com" <sassmann@...hat.com>,
        "Loktionov, Aleksandr" <aleksandr.loktionov@...el.com>,
        "Bowers, AndrewX" <andrewx.bowers@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [net-next 4/9] i40e: detect and log info about pre-recovery
 mode

On Tue, 23 Jun 2020 03:13:35 +0000 Kirsher, Jeffrey T wrote:
> In patch 8, the functions are not so small and simple.  Are you sure
> the compiler would inline them if we did not explicitly 'inline'
> them?  I want to make sure before making that change.

I'm not, but why are they supposed to be inlined - programming promisc
seems hardly to be so performance sensitive we can't take a function
call...

Also can the functions be reordered there so no forward declarations
are needed?