linux-kernel - Re: [patch v3 21/36] Hexagon: Add SMP support

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: <20110912233827.GB6925@codeaurora.org>
Date:	Mon, 12 Sep 2011 18:38:27 -0500
From:	Richard Kuo <rkuo@...eaurora.org>
To:	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>
Cc:	linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, linux-hexagon@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Linas Vepstas <linas@...eaurora.org>
Subject: Re: [patch v3 21/36] Hexagon: Add SMP support

On Sun, Sep 11, 2011 at 11:51:52AM -0300, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> And on the producer side, a spinlock for one or... that looks like wheel
> re-inventing to me :-)
> 
> In fact your bit iteration loop also re-invents find_*_bit interfaces.
> 
> Any reason why you don't simply use bitops or atomics here ?

No particular reason; just the way it turned out when I was getting things
working.  I'll get them cleaned up.


> Also what is your memory model ? ordered or weakly ordered ? Do you need
> some kind of memory barrier between setting ipi->bits and
> __vmintop_post() ?

Our model is ordered, so there's no need for a barrier there yet.


Thanks,
Richard Kuo


-- 

Sent by an employee of the Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum.
--
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/