linux-kernel - Re: down_spin() implementation

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: <200803290048.22931.arnd@arndb.de>
Date:	Sat, 29 Mar 2008 00:48:21 +0100
From:	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To:	"Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@...el.com>
Cc:	"Matthew Wilcox" <matthew@....cx>,
	"Nick Piggin" <nickpiggin@...oo.com.au>,
	"Stephen Rothwell" <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
	linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: down_spin() implementation

On Friday 28 March 2008, Luck, Tony wrote:
> > So it makes little sense to add this to semaphores.  Better to introduce
> > a spinaphore, as you say.
> 
> > struct {
> >   atomic_t cur;
> >   int max;
> > } ss_t;
> 
> Could this API sneak into the bottom of one or the other of
> linux/include/{spinlock,semaphore}.h ... or should it get its own
> spinaphore.h file?
>
> Or should I follow Alan's earlier advice and keep this as an ia64
> only thing (since I'll be the only user).

If you use the simple version suggested last by Willy, I think it
could even be open-coded in your TLB management code.

Should we decided to make it an official interface, I'd suggest
putting it into atomic.h, because it operates on a plain atomic_t.

	Arnd <><
--
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/