linux-kernel - Re: spin_is_locked() broken for uniprocessor?

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:	Wed, 19 Aug 2009 00:24:02 +0200 (CEST)
From:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To:	Kumar Gala <galak@...nel.crashing.org>
cc:	Linux-Kernel List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
	linuxppc-dev list <linuxppc-dev@...abs.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Subject: Re: spin_is_locked() broken for uniprocessor?

On Tue, 18 Aug 2009, Kumar Gala wrote:
> I just want to validate that what I'm seeing (for UP, non-debug features):
> 
> spin_is_locked() is defined as:
> 
> include/linux/spinlock.h:#define spin_is_locked(lock)
> __raw_spin_is_locked(&(lock)->raw_lock)
> 
> for UP that should get us:
> 
> include/linux/spinlock_up.h:#define __raw_spin_is_locked(lock)  ((void)(lock),
> 0)
> 
> which implies to me that spin_is_locked() will always return false.  Is this
> expected behavior.

That's wrong. spin_is_locked should always return true on UP.

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/