| 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
| ||
|
Date: Sat, 11 Oct 2008 19:29:01 +0400
From: Andrey Borzenkov <arvidjaar@...l.ru>
To: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: when spin_lock_irq (as opposed to spin_lock_irqsave) is appropriate?
Logically, one piece of kernel code has no way to know whether another
piece of kernel code (or may be hard-/firmware) has disabled some
interrupt line. So it looks like spin_lock_irq should not even exist,
except may be for very specific cases (where we are sure no other piece
of kernel code may run concurrently)?
Sorry for stupid question, I an not actually a HW type of person ...
Download attachment "signature.asc " of type "application/pgp-signature" (198 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists