linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 01/11] MFD: DA9052 MFD core module v2

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: <20110723104333.GA13883@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>
Date:	Sat, 23 Jul 2011 11:43:34 +0100
From:	Mark Brown <broonie@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com>
To:	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Cc:	Shawn Guo <shawn.guo@...escale.com>,
	ashishj3 <ashish.jangam@...tcummins.com>,
	Dajun <dajun.chen@...semi.com>, sameo@...nedhand.com,
	linaro-dev@...ts.linaro.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/11] MFD: DA9052 MFD core module v2

On Sat, Jul 23, 2011 at 11:50:30AM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:

> Yes, that makes sense. There are also cases where a mutex should really
> be a spinlock (which is by definition not interruptible), or vice
> versa. I don't know if this is one of them.

We would be using spinlocks except the underlying buses sleep waiting
for the hardware to complete the transfer - the operations are quick
enough from a user perspective but at the very low level we want the CPU
to be able to go off and do other things while they're happening.
--
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/