linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3/7] regmap: Add a mutex to guard the sync operation

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 28 Sep 2011 16:52:45 +0100
From:	Dimitris Papastamos <dp@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com>
To:	Mark Brown <broonie@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@...afoo.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/7] regmap: Add a mutex to guard the sync operation

On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 04:19:37PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 03:24:06PM +0100, Dimitris Papastamos wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 01:52:50PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> 
> > > Shouldn't we either be taking the regmap lock when doing the sync or
> > > otherwise guarding against something other than a cache sync?
> 
> > Em the main issue is that the sync() implementation will use
> > regmap_write() which will grab map->lock.  To avoid this we could have
> > gone and used directly the lockless _regmap_write() but that's
> > static.  To be honest, it feels cleaner to have only 1 lock to guard
> > the map so maybe we should get rid of map->sync_lock.
> 
> Making _regmap_write() global seems fine, it's not an externally visible
> API but the cache code is part of the infrastructure.

Okay, so I'll go forth and revert the use of map->sync_lock
and just grab map->lock.

Thanks,
Dimitris
--
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/