Re: [PATCH] [LSM] Rework LSM hooks

[James Morris]

On Tue, 10 Aug 2004, Kurt Garloff wrote:

> * Even with selinux=0 and capability loaded, the kernel takes a 
>   few percents in networking benchmarks (measured by HP on ia64); 
>   this is caused by the slowliness of indirect jumps on ia64.

Is this just an ia64 issue?  If so, then perhaps we should look at only
penalising ia64?  Otherwise, loading an LSM module is going to cause
expensive false unlikely() on _every_ LSM hook.


- James
-- 
James Morris
<jmorris@xxxxxxxxxx>




-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/