linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4] introduce macro spin_event

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 12 Mar 2009 10:54:47 -0500
From:	Timur Tabi <timur@...escale.com>
To:	Grant Likely <grant.likely@...retlab.ca>
Cc:	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, rdreier@...co.com,
	jirislaby@...il.com, peterz@...radead.org, will.newton@...il.com,
	hancockrwd@...il.com, jeremy@...p.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] introduce macro spin_event_timeout()

On Wed, Mar 11, 2009 at 9:45 PM, Grant Likely <grant.likely@...retlab.ca> wrote:

>> The other big advantage of that approach is that drivers that aren't in
>> an atomic section can use msleep() and allow the kernel to schedule on
>> that processor.
>
> Ack!  I totally agree.

I'm glad everyone agrees.  I still don't know how to solve the
problem, though.  I came up with this:

#define spin_until_timeout(condition, timeout)          \
       for (unsigned long __timeout = jiffies + (timeout);     \
               (!(condition) && time_after(jiffies, __timeout)); )

Now how do I modify this so that the caller knows whether the loop
terminated because of a timeout or the condition became true?

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