linux-kernel - Re: LinuxPPS & spinlocks

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: <46AA4A1E.8040302@nortel.com>
Date:	Fri, 27 Jul 2007 13:40:14 -0600
From:	"Chris Friesen" <cfriesen@...tel.com>
To:	Rodolfo Giometti <giometti@...eenne.com>
CC:	David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: LinuxPPS & spinlocks

Rodolfo Giometti wrote:

> What do you mean? Did you find an error into my patch? :-o
> 
> Functions pps_event() and
> pps_register_source()/pps_unregister_source() take accesso to shared
> data, that's why I used spinlocks.

My point is that the lock should be used to protect specific data. 
Thus, it would be more correct to say, "spinlock foo is taken because 
pps_register_source() accesses variable bar".

That way, if someone else wants to access "bar", they know that they 
need to take lock "foo".

Chris
-
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/