linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH for review] [12/48] x86

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, 19 Jul 2007 15:23:30 -0400
From:	"Dmitry Torokhov" <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>
To:	"Andi Kleen" <ak@...e.de>
Cc:	tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...e.hu, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH for review] [12/48] x86_64: use the global PIT lock

On 7/19/07, Andi Kleen <ak@...e.de> wrote:
> On Thursday 19 July 2007 17:22:38 Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> > Hi Andi,
> >
> > On 7/19/07, Andi Kleen <ak@...e.de> wrote:
> > >
> > > From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
> > >
> > > Replace the pcspkr private PIT lock by the global PIT lock to serialize the
> > > PIT access all over the place.
> > >
> >
> > Like I said before I'd be more happy if spinlock was attached to a
> > platform device that pcspkr binds to so the arch code would control
> > wehther we use a private spinlock or a global one (I sent a patch to
> > that effect earlier).
>
> Not sure that flexibility is needed. Why would an architecture ever want
> to have more than one lock for this? And we normally don't need sysdevs
> for locks, they seem to be quite unrelated.
>

I was not talking about sysdevs. I was talking about platform devices
that are already being created for pcspkr by arch code. Now I want
arch code to provide a spinlock for pcspkr driver to use when
accessing PIT. What it does it allows to remove arch specific
knowledge (i.e. #ifdef CONFIG_X86...) from the pcspkr driver.

-- 
Dmitry
-
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/