linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4] clk: allow reentrant calls into the clk framework

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>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.02.1303271811020.22263@ionos>
Date:	Wed, 27 Mar 2013 18:12:22 +0100 (CET)
From:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To:	Mike Turquette <mturquette@...aro.org>
cc:	Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com>,
	linaro-kernel@...ts.linaro.org, patches@...aro.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, David Brown <davidb@...eaurora.org>,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] clk: allow reentrant calls into the clk framework

On Wed, 27 Mar 2013, Mike Turquette wrote:
> Quoting Laurent Pinchart (2013-03-27 02:08:15)
> > I wonder if it would make sense to abstract these operations in a generic 
> > recursive mutex. Given that it would delay this patch past v3.10 I won't push 
> > for that.
> > 
> 
> Having a nice implementation of recursive mutexes would have saved me
> some time.

If you encapsulate stuff nicely like I suggested, then switching to a
generic version later on is a nobrainer.
 
Thanks,

	tglx
--
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/