linux-kernel - Re: [RESEND PATCH 05/14] eeprom: at24: hide the read/write loop behind a macro

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:	Sat, 16 Jul 2016 00:03:52 +0900
From:	Wolfram Sang <wsa@...-dreams.de>
To:	Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@...libre.com>
Cc:	linux-i2c <linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
	Srinivas Kandagatla <srinivas.kandagatla@...aro.org>,
	Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@...e-electrons.com>,
	GregKH <greg@...ah.com>
Subject: Re: [RESEND PATCH 05/14] eeprom: at24: hide the read/write loop
 behind a macro


> >> +#define loop_until_timeout(tout, op_time)                            \
> >> +     for (tout = jiffies + msecs_to_jiffies(write_timeout),          \
> >> +             op_time = jiffies;                                      \
> >> +          time_before(op_time, tout);                                \
> >> +          usleep_range(1000, 1500), op_time = jiffies)
> >
> > There is one subtle change coming with this change: the do-while loop is
> > guaranteed to run at least once while the for-loop doesn't.
> >
> 
> While it's technically possible, it will never happen as long as
> write_timeout is set to some sensible value.

I know that. I prefer Linux to be rock-stable, though, even when
slightly misconfigured (or under extreme load for that matter). An
incremental patch would be enough, no need to resend.


Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (820 bytes)