From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932468AbVHKXCc (ORCPT ); Thu, 11 Aug 2005 19:02:32 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932491AbVHKXCc (ORCPT ); Thu, 11 Aug 2005 19:02:32 -0400 Received: from mail25.sea5.speakeasy.net ([69.17.117.27]:58590 "EHLO mail25.sea5.speakeasy.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932468AbVHKXCb (ORCPT ); Thu, 11 Aug 2005 19:02:31 -0400 Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2005 19:02:28 -0400 (EDT) From: James Morris X-X-Sender: jmorris@excalibur.intercode To: serue@us.ibm.com cc: lkml , Chris Wright , Stephen Smalley , Andrew Morton Subject: Re: [PATCH] Stacker - single-use static slots In-Reply-To: <20050811212209.GB28004@serge.austin.ibm.com> Message-ID: References: <20050727181732.GA22483@serge.austin.ibm.com> <20050803164516.GB13691@serge.austin.ibm.com> <20050810144516.GA5796@serge.austin.ibm.com> <20050811212209.GB28004@serge.austin.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 11 Aug 2005, serue@us.ibm.com wrote: > I guess I should do some profiling runs - I'm surprised there would be > this much of a hit with the static slots. Yes. It could be some cache effect, where the exact placement of the SELinux pointer might be critical, and also vary depending on the hook and subclass of SELinux security struct. - James -- James Morris