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
| ||
|
Date: Tue, 9 Apr 2013 13:45:44 +0200 From: Wim Van Sebroeck <wim@...ana.be> To: Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net> Cc: Samuel Ortiz <sameo@...ux.intel.com>, linux-watchdog@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Pádraig Brady <P@...igBrady.com> Subject: Re: mfd: Core driver for Winbond chips Hi Guenter, > I was waiting for feedback from Wim, who submitted a similar driver, about his > thoughts. Key question is how to reserve access to the shared resource - either > through an exported function in the mfd driver requesting a mutex, or through > request_muxed_region(). I am going back and forth myself on which one is better. > > Maybe it does not really matter, but using a function has the slight advantage > that it auto-loads and locks the mfd module while one of its client modules > is loaded. If we use request_muxed_region, that is not the case and the client > module must use another means to request and lock the mfd module. > > Maybe you have an opinion ? This is indeed the main issue that has to be solved. Both options will work. I like the auto-load and lock, but I need to look at the request_muxed_region code again first before I can see what the possible drawbacks are :-). Kind regards, Wim. -- 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists