linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 6/6] stop_machine: kill stop_cpus_lock and lg_double

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Date:	Mon, 3 Aug 2015 16:58:27 +0200
From:	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 6/6] stop_machine: kill stop_cpus_lock and
	lg_double_lock/unlock()

On 07/31, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
> +	for_each_cpu(cpu, cpumask)
> +		arch_spin_lock((arch_spinlock_t *)&per_cpu(cpu_stopper.lock, cpu));
> +
>  	for_each_cpu(cpu, cpumask) {
>  		work = &per_cpu(cpu_stopper.stop_work, cpu);
>  		work->fn = fn;
>  		work->arg = arg;
>  		work->done = done;
> -		cpu_stop_queue_work(cpu, work);
> +		__cpu_stop_queue_work(cpu, work);
>  	}
> -	lg_global_unlock(&stop_cpus_lock);
> +
> +	for_each_cpu(cpu, cpumask)
> +		arch_spin_unlock((arch_spinlock_t *)&per_cpu(cpu_stopper.lock, cpu));

Of course, we discussed this before and I think this should work too.
However to me this looks more ugly (although better than the current
code), and this is what I tried to avoid.

But! of course "more ugly" is very much subjective, so I won't really
argue if you prefer this change. That said, let me write another email
in reply to your initial review.

Oleg.

--
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/