linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/3] 64-bit futexes: Intro

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: <alpine.LFD.1.10.0805311530010.3141@woody.linux-foundation.org>
Date:	Sat, 31 May 2008 15:32:01 -0700 (PDT)
From:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Ulrich Drepper <drepper@...hat.com>
cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	mtk.manpages@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] 64-bit futexes: Intro

On Sat, 31 May 2008, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> 	 * Note that we don't need to update the high bits if we
> 	 * succeed (because the writer count is the _pending_ writer
> 	 * count, not the holding one)

Btw, that comment is bogus, ignore it. It comes from an earlier algorithm 
I tried that also explained the contention case, but got unnecessarily 
complex. Separating out the queuing behaviour from the actual 
non-contended behaviour made things much simpler to explain, so I stopped 
even bothering with a "both" case.

Too much cut-and-paste, IOW.

		Linus
--
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/