linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] Introduce down

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: <1211471323.18130.84.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Date:	Thu, 22 May 2008 08:48:43 -0700
From:	Daniel Walker <dwalker@...sta.com>
To:	Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>
Cc:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
	Matthew Wilcox <matthew@....cx>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Introduce down_nowait()


On Thu, 2008-05-22 at 18:56 +1000, Rusty Russell wrote:

> The patches to change down_trylock to down_try touch a heap of files, which 
> are also touched in other people's trees.  If this patch goes upstream, those 
> people rewriting that code can use down_try in their rewrite, and I can throw 
> mine away.

Seems like it's too much trouble.. I mean, we're removing semaphores
anyway and down_trylock with them. I'll agree with Andrew down_trylock
removal is pretty glacial. It's cause there aren't many of them and most
of the ones I've looked at are in strange locking schemes, which makes
them difficult to remove.. 

I'm not against your changes, but if it's going to cause problems I'd
rather people focus on mutex_trylock instead.

Daniel

--
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/