linux-kernel - Re: [RFC] Reentrant clock sources

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.2.00.0811252215270.3235@localhost.localdomain>
Date:	Tue, 25 Nov 2008 22:22:11 +0100 (CET)
From:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To:	Magnus Damm <magnus.damm@...il.com>
cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	lethal@...ux-sh.org, johnstul@...ibm.com, mingo@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [RFC] Reentrant clock sources

On Tue, 25 Nov 2008, Magnus Damm wrote:
> Hi everyone,
> 
> Is there any special reason behind the non-reentrant clock source
> code? I'm writing some timer help code and getting the struct
> clocksource as argument to the callbacks would make the code much
> cleaner and better.

Why do you want that ? And what has reentrancy to do with the
clocksource argument to read() ?

> Extending the callbacks to be able to start and stop clock sources
> for improved power management would be good too in my opinion.
> Any thoughts?

What have you in mind there ? Starting / stopping a clocksource when
what happens ? You can't stop them randomly except you want to screw
timekeeping.

> +	cycle_t (*vread)(struct clocksource *cs);

This is crap. vread can not access the clocksource.

Thanks,

	tglx
--
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/