linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4] introduce macro spin_event

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: <20090311165806.0b6838ab@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Date:	Wed, 11 Mar 2009 16:58:06 +0000
From:	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
To:	Timur Tabi <timur@...escale.com>
Cc:	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, rdreier@...co.com,
	jirislaby@...il.com, peterz@...radead.org, will.newton@...il.com,
	hancockrwd@...il.com, jeremy@...p.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] introduce macro spin_event_timeout()

> Are you talking about the udelay() inside the loop?  If so, I agree
> that this is bad and have removed it in the PowerPC-specific version:

The behaviour you want there is system specific - 10uS is a minimum
politeness value for x86 PCI bus for example.

> rdtsc instruction.  In this case, we're not adding arbitrary delays
> into the loop, and we're not using jiffies, but we are
> architecture-dependent.

and not useful

A macro of this form really needs to be able to look like

	spin_until_timeout(readb(foo) & 0x80, 30 * HZ) {
		udelay(10);
		/* Maybe do other stuff */
	}

to be more generally useful
--
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/