linux-kernel - Re: [patch 2.6.24-rc2 1/3] generic gpio -- gpio

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: <200711150017.29617.david-b@pacbell.net>
Date:	Thu, 15 Nov 2007 00:17:29 -0800
From:	David Brownell <david-b@...bell.net>
To:	Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@...oo.com.au>
Cc:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Linux Kernel list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Florian Fainelli <florian.fainelli@...ecomint.eu>,
	Haavard Skinnemoen <hskinnemoen@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [patch 2.6.24-rc2 1/3] generic gpio -- gpio_chip support

On Wednesday 14 November 2007, Nick Piggin wrote:
> > > > All this does is prevent constant and needless checking for
> > > > "do you want to preempt me now?" "now?" "now?" in "now?" the
> > > > middle "now?" of "now?" i/o "now?" loops.
> > >
> > > Actually that's wrong.
> >
> > Certainly it's right for the mainstream kernel.  Dropping a
> > lock (other than a raw spinlock) does that checking; when a
> > loop needs to acquire then drop such a lock, that's exactly
> > what's going on.
> 
> Obviously a raw spinlock is no different from a regular
> spinlock upstream.

Erm, no.  The raw ones don't have the extra logic when
the lock gets dropped.

-
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/