linux-kernel - Re: [TOMOYO #14 (mmotm 2008-12-30-16-05) 02/10] Singly linked list 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]

Date:	Thu, 08 Jan 2009 15:19:52 +0900
From:	Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.sakura.ne.jp>
To:	serue@...ibm.com
Cc:	jmorris@...ei.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [TOMOYO #14 (mmotm 2008-12-30-16-05) 02/10] Singly linked list implementation.

Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
> > TOMOYO's singly linked list (which is named as "list1") implementation has
> > below characteristics.
> > 
> >  (1) Supports "add" and "read" operations.
> >  (2) Caller holds a lock when adding, but doesn't hold a lock when reading.
> >  (3) Iteration method (for_each_*) needs to call rcu_dereference() because
> >      caller doesn't hold a lock when reading.
> > 
> > I think it is not a good thing to rename "list1" to "slist".
> 
> How about alist (or aolist) for append-only list?
> 
> The problem with list1 is that it *really* doesn't imply the
> characteristics you cite.
> 
OK.

A developer who reads a code using this list likely wonders
"Why no read_lock() before reading this list?".
Thus, I'd like to rename to "rlfl" (Read-Lock-Free List).
--
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/