linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] mutex: add support for reservation style locks, v2

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: <20130410093322.GH27612@phenom.ffwll.local>
Date:	Wed, 10 Apr 2013 11:33:22 +0200
From:	Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>
To:	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>,
	Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@...onical.com>,
	linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, daniel.vetter@...ll.ch, x86@...nel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org,
	linaro-mm-sig@...ts.linaro.org, robclark@...il.com,
	tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...e.hu, linux-media@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] mutex: add support for reservation style locks, v2

On Tue, Apr 09, 2013 at 06:28:08PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 04, 2013 at 06:41:02PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Thu, 2013-04-04 at 15:31 +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> > > The thing is now that you're not expected to hold these locks for a
> > > long
> > > time - if you need to synchronously stall while holding a lock
> > > performance
> > > will go down the gutters anyway. And since most current
> > > gpus/co-processors
> > > still can't really preempt fairness isn't that high a priority,
> > > either.
> > > So we didn't think too much about that.
> > 
> > Yeah but you're proposing a new synchronization primitive for the core
> > kernel.. all such 'fun' details need to be considered, not only those
> > few that bear on the one usecase.
> 
> Which bares the question, what other use cases are there?

Tbh I don't see any other either - but I agree with Peter and thinking
things through and making the api a bit more generic seems to help in
clarifying the semantics. Reminds me that I still need to draw a few
diagrams ;-)
-Daniel
-- 
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
+41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch
--
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/