* Kees Cook wrote:
> Many subsystems will not use refcount_t unless there is a way to build the
> kernel so that there is no regression in speed compared to atomic_t. This
> adds CONFIG_REFCOUNT_FULL to enable the full refcount_t implementation
> which has the validation
* Kees Cook wrote:
> Many subsystems will not use refcount_t unless there is a way to build the
> kernel so that there is no regression in speed compared to atomic_t. This
> adds CONFIG_REFCOUNT_FULL to enable the full refcount_t implementation
> which has the validation but is slightly slower.
On Wed, Jun 7, 2017 at 10:56 PM, Greg KH wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 07, 2017 at 07:58:31PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
>> Many subsystems will not use refcount_t unless there is a way to build the
>> kernel so that there is no regression in speed compared to atomic_t. This
>>
On Wed, Jun 7, 2017 at 10:56 PM, Greg KH wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 07, 2017 at 07:58:31PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
>> Many subsystems will not use refcount_t unless there is a way to build the
>> kernel so that there is no regression in speed compared to atomic_t. This
>> adds CONFIG_REFCOUNT_FULL to
On Fri, Jun 09, 2017 at 06:24:04AM +0200, Manfred Spraul wrote:
> Hi Davidlohr,
>
> On 06/08/2017 10:09 PM, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
> >
> >Yes, this would be a prerequisite for ipc; which I initially thought
> >didn't
> >take a performance hit.
> >
> Did you see a regression for ipc?
I'd be most
On Fri, Jun 09, 2017 at 06:24:04AM +0200, Manfred Spraul wrote:
> Hi Davidlohr,
>
> On 06/08/2017 10:09 PM, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
> >
> >Yes, this would be a prerequisite for ipc; which I initially thought
> >didn't
> >take a performance hit.
> >
> Did you see a regression for ipc?
I'd be most
Hi Davidlohr,
On 06/08/2017 10:09 PM, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
Yes, this would be a prerequisite for ipc; which I initially thought
didn't
take a performance hit.
Did you see a regression for ipc?
The fast paths don't use the refcount, it is only used for rare situations:
- GETALL, SETALL
Hi Davidlohr,
On 06/08/2017 10:09 PM, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
Yes, this would be a prerequisite for ipc; which I initially thought
didn't
take a performance hit.
Did you see a regression for ipc?
The fast paths don't use the refcount, it is only used for rare situations:
- GETALL, SETALL
On Thu, 08 Jun 2017, Reshetova, Elena wrote:
On Wed, Jun 07, 2017 at 07:58:31PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> Many subsystems will not use refcount_t unless there is a way to build the
> kernel so that there is no regression in speed compared to atomic_t. This
> adds CONFIG_REFCOUNT_FULL to enable
On Thu, 08 Jun 2017, Reshetova, Elena wrote:
On Wed, Jun 07, 2017 at 07:58:31PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> Many subsystems will not use refcount_t unless there is a way to build the
> kernel so that there is no regression in speed compared to atomic_t. This
> adds CONFIG_REFCOUNT_FULL to enable
> On Wed, Jun 07, 2017 at 07:58:31PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> > Many subsystems will not use refcount_t unless there is a way to build the
> > kernel so that there is no regression in speed compared to atomic_t. This
> > adds CONFIG_REFCOUNT_FULL to enable the full refcount_t implementation
> >
> On Wed, Jun 07, 2017 at 07:58:31PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> > Many subsystems will not use refcount_t unless there is a way to build the
> > kernel so that there is no regression in speed compared to atomic_t. This
> > adds CONFIG_REFCOUNT_FULL to enable the full refcount_t implementation
> >
On Wed, Jun 07, 2017 at 07:58:31PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> Many subsystems will not use refcount_t unless there is a way to build the
> kernel so that there is no regression in speed compared to atomic_t. This
> adds CONFIG_REFCOUNT_FULL to enable the full refcount_t implementation
> which has
On Wed, Jun 07, 2017 at 07:58:31PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> Many subsystems will not use refcount_t unless there is a way to build the
> kernel so that there is no regression in speed compared to atomic_t. This
> adds CONFIG_REFCOUNT_FULL to enable the full refcount_t implementation
> which has
On Wed, Jun 07, 2017 at 07:58:31PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> Many subsystems will not use refcount_t unless there is a way to build the
> kernel so that there is no regression in speed compared to atomic_t. This
> adds CONFIG_REFCOUNT_FULL to enable the full refcount_t implementation
> which has
On Wed, Jun 07, 2017 at 07:58:31PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> Many subsystems will not use refcount_t unless there is a way to build the
> kernel so that there is no regression in speed compared to atomic_t. This
> adds CONFIG_REFCOUNT_FULL to enable the full refcount_t implementation
> which has
Many subsystems will not use refcount_t unless there is a way to build the
kernel so that there is no regression in speed compared to atomic_t. This
adds CONFIG_REFCOUNT_FULL to enable the full refcount_t implementation
which has the validation but is slightly slower. When not enabled,
refcount_t
Many subsystems will not use refcount_t unless there is a way to build the
kernel so that there is no regression in speed compared to atomic_t. This
adds CONFIG_REFCOUNT_FULL to enable the full refcount_t implementation
which has the validation but is slightly slower. When not enabled,
refcount_t
18 matches
Mail list logo