On Thu, Mar 08, 2018 at 08:31:47AM -0800, Eric Dumazet wrote:
>
> Because that would not be nice.
>
> this_cpu_read() is faster than going through raw_smp_processor_id() and
> per_cpu_ptr()
I see. In that case I have no objections to this patch.
Thanks,
--
Email: Herbert Xu
On 03/07/2018 11:33 PM, Herbert Xu wrote:
On Wed, Mar 07, 2018 at 11:24:16AM -0800, Greg Hackmann wrote:
f7c83bcbfaf5 ("net: xfrm: use __this_cpu_read per-cpu helper") added a
__this_cpu_read() call inside ipcomp_alloc_tfms(). Since this call was
introduced, the rules around per-cpu
On Wed, Mar 07, 2018 at 11:24:16AM -0800, Greg Hackmann wrote:
> f7c83bcbfaf5 ("net: xfrm: use __this_cpu_read per-cpu helper") added a
> __this_cpu_read() call inside ipcomp_alloc_tfms(). Since this call was
> introduced, the rules around per-cpu accessors have been tightened and
>
On 03/07/2018 12:21 PM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> On Wed, 2018-03-07 at 11:24 -0800, Greg Hackmann wrote:
>> f7c83bcbfaf5 ("net: xfrm: use __this_cpu_read per-cpu helper") added
>> a
>> __this_cpu_read() call inside ipcomp_alloc_tfms(). Since this call
>> was
>> introduced, the rules around per-cpu
On Wed, 2018-03-07 at 11:24 -0800, Greg Hackmann wrote:
> f7c83bcbfaf5 ("net: xfrm: use __this_cpu_read per-cpu helper") added
> a
> __this_cpu_read() call inside ipcomp_alloc_tfms(). Since this call
> was
> introduced, the rules around per-cpu accessors have been tightened
> and
>
f7c83bcbfaf5 ("net: xfrm: use __this_cpu_read per-cpu helper") added a
__this_cpu_read() call inside ipcomp_alloc_tfms(). Since this call was
introduced, the rules around per-cpu accessors have been tightened and
__this_cpu_read() cannot be used in a preemptible context.
syzkaller reported this
