linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] kernel:async function call:introduce async_run

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20090518065858.387b7012@infradead.org>
Date:	Mon, 18 May 2009 06:58:58 -0700
From:	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>
To:	Cornelia Huck <cornelia.huck@...ibm.com>
Cc:	tom.leiming@...il.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	akpm@...ux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] kernel:async function call:introduce
 async_run_inatomic(v3)

On Mon, 18 May 2009 13:10:54 +0200
Cornelia Huck <cornelia.huck@...ibm.com> wrote:

> On Sat, 16 May 2009 21:54:17 +0800,
> tom.leiming@...il.com wrote:
> 
> > + /**
> > + * async_run_inatomic - in atomic contexts schedule a function for
> > + * 			asynchronous execution
> > + *
> > + * @ptr: function to execute asynchronously
> > + * @data: data pointer to pass to the function
> > + *
> > + * The purpose of this function is to offer a simple way to
> > schedule an
> > + * asynchronous thread from an atomic context.
> > + *
> > + * Return zero one success, !zero on failured
> > + * Note: async_run_inatomic() uses a distinct running list in order
> > + * to avoid slowing down synchronization within the general domain.
> > + * Since it does not return a cookie for checkpointing, it is for
> > callers
> > + * that don't need later synchronization.
> > + */
> > +int async_run_inatomic(async_func_ptr *ptr, void *data)
> > +{
> > +	return !__async_schedule(ptr, data,
> > &async_running_no_sync, 1); +}
> > +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(async_run_inatomic);
> > +
> 
> While we can skip synchronization on cookies, we still need something
> like async_run_synchronize() for module unloading (and possibly
> others).

We don't have this problem if we use the existing naming and existing
standard domain... 
(I don't like the "run" part of the name, rather than schedule.. lets
keep the apis consistent please)


-- 
Arjan van de Ven 	Intel Open Source Technology Centre
For development, discussion and tips for power savings, 
visit http://www.lesswatts.org
--
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/