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
| ||
|
Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2012 08:22:34 +0200 From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com> To: Kevin Groeneveld <kgroeneveld@...il.com> Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] ppp: add 64 bit stats On Mon, 2012-07-23 at 21:53 -0400, Kevin Groeneveld wrote: > On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 11:59 AM, Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com> wrote: > >> Would proper synchronization in this case just be wrapping the updates > >> in a spin_lock/spin_unlock? > > > > Would be fine (if the proper BH safe variant is used), or you could also > > use atomic64_t. > > Which would you recommend, spin locks or atomic64_t? > > atomic64_t seems like it would be simpler. Simpler but a bit more expensive when two counters are changed at the same time. (two atomic ops instead of a single one for the spinlock) -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists