linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Eric Paris <eparis@parisplace.org>
To: Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org,
	Dmitry Kasatkin <dmitry.kasatkin@intel.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
	David Safford <safford@watson.ibm.com>,
	Mimi Zohar <zohar@us.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH v1 5/9] ima: allocating iint improvements
Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2012 11:58:54 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CACLa4ptFgmCL7Z4e-YO9XJ_zkr=kOHSJ7cA8u3DPvVc-2LBfRw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1327961644-6886-6-git-send-email-zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>

On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 5:14 PM, Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> From: Dmitry Kasatkin <dmitry.kasatkin@intel.com>
>

>  static struct rb_root integrity_iint_tree = RB_ROOT;
> -static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(integrity_iint_lock);
> +static DEFINE_RWLOCK(integrity_iint_lock);
>  static struct kmem_cache *iint_cache __read_mostly;

Has any profiling been done here?   rwlocks have been shown to
actually be slower on multi processor systems in a number of cases due
to the cache line bouncing required.  I believe the current kernel
logic is that if you have a short critical section and you can't show
profile data the rwlocks are better, just stick with a spinlock.

  reply	other threads:[~2012-02-01 16:58 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-01-30 22:13 [RFC][PATCH v1 0/9] ima: appraisal extension Mimi Zohar
2012-01-30 22:13 ` [RFC][PATCH v1 1/9] vfs: extend vfs_removexattr locking Mimi Zohar
2012-01-30 22:13 ` [RFC][PATCH v1 2/9] vfs: move ima_file_free before releasing the file Mimi Zohar
2012-01-30 22:13 ` [RFC][PATCH v1 3/9] ima: integrity appraisal extension Mimi Zohar
2012-01-30 22:13 ` [RFC][PATCH v1 4/9] ima: add appraise action keywords and default rules Mimi Zohar
2012-01-30 22:14 ` [RFC][PATCH v1 5/9] ima: allocating iint improvements Mimi Zohar
2012-02-01 16:58   ` Eric Paris [this message]
2012-02-01 18:46     ` Kasatkin, Dmitry
2012-02-09  9:40       ` Kasatkin, Dmitry
2012-01-30 22:14 ` [RFC][PATCH v1 6/9] ima: add inode_post_setattr call Mimi Zohar
2012-01-30 22:14 ` [RFC][PATCH v1 7/9] ima: add ima_inode_setxattr/removexattr function and calls Mimi Zohar
2012-01-30 22:14 ` [RFC][PATCH v1 8/9] ima: add support for different security.ima data types Mimi Zohar
2012-01-30 22:14 ` [RFC][PATCH v1 9/9] ima: digital signature verification support Mimi Zohar

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to='CACLa4ptFgmCL7Z4e-YO9XJ_zkr=kOHSJ7cA8u3DPvVc-2LBfRw@mail.gmail.com' \
    --to=eparis@parisplace.org \
    --cc=dmitry.kasatkin@intel.com \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=safford@watson.ibm.com \
    --cc=zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=zohar@us.ibm.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).