linux-kernel - Re: [RFC] [PATCH] Lightweight kernel condition variables: faster code, fewer bugs

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: <4E31BC2D.50306@2net.co.uk>
Date:	Thu, 28 Jul 2011 20:44:45 +0100
From:	Chris Simmonds <chris.simmonds@...t.co.uk>
To:	Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>
CC:	Chris <chris@...t.co.uk>,
	Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, mingo@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [RFC] [PATCH] Lightweight kernel condition variables: faster
 code, fewer bugs

On 28/07/11 18:00, Alan Stern wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Jul 2011, Chris Simmonds wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> This patch adds lightweight condition variables to the kernel to reduce
>> complexity and improve the efficiency of some synchronisation tasks.
>> They are very similar to POSIX condition variables.
>
> It seems like a reasonable sort of thing to do, as far as I can see.
>

Thanks, and thank you for the review.

> One little problem here.  These routines may well be large enough
> that it's inefficient to inline them.  In that case they should be
> declared in wait.h but defined somewhere else, such as kernel/wait.c.
> Conversely, if you do think they deserve to be inlined then they should
> be marked as such.

I was not planning to make them inline. I will change the patch to do as 
you say.

>
> P.S.: Does this come through checkpatch.pl unscathed?
>

In truth, no. The next one will.

Chris.
--
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/