linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/3] powerpc: Fixup hard_irq

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]

Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.62.0705100942590.32241@pademelon.sonytel.be>
Date:	Thu, 10 May 2007 09:44:18 +0200 (CEST)
From:	Geert Uytterhoeven <Geert.Uytterhoeven@...ycom.com>
To:	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>
cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@...abs.org,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] powerpc: Fixup hard_irq_disable semantics

On Thu, 10 May 2007, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> This patch renames the raw hard_irq_{enable,disable} into
> __hard_irq_{enable,disable} and introduces a higher level
> hard_irq_disable() function that can be used by any code
> to enforce that IRQs are fully disabled, not only lazy
> disabled.

Why did you rename hard_irq_enable() too?

Isn't it more logical to have high-level hard_irq_disable() and
hard_irq_enable(), and a special low-level __hard_irq_disable()?

Gr{oetje,eeting}s,

						Geert

--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- Sony Network and Software Technology Center Europe (NSCE)
Geert.Uytterhoeven@...ycom.com ------- The Corporate Village, Da Vincilaan 7-D1
Voice +32-2-7008453 Fax +32-2-7008622 ---------------- B-1935 Zaventem, Belgium
-
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/