linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/5] perf: generic intel uncore 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: <1332927532.2528.19.camel@twins>
Date:	Wed, 28 Mar 2012 11:38:52 +0200
From:	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
To:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
Cc:	"Yan, Zheng" <zheng.z.yan@...el.com>, mingo@...e.hu,
	eranian@...gle.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	ming.m.lin@...el.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/5] perf: generic intel uncore support

On Wed, 2012-03-28 at 11:24 +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 02:43:15PM +0800, Yan, Zheng wrote:
> > +static void uncore_perf_event_update(struct intel_uncore_box *box,
> > +                                   struct perf_event *event)
> > +{
> > +     raw_spin_lock(&box->lock);
> 
> I think a raw lock would be only needed if the uncore was called
> from the scheduler context switch, which it should not be.
> 
> So you can use a normal lock instead of a raw lock.

Please ignore any and all feedback from wrongbot Andi, as said I'll
review the patches later this week.
--
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/