linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] smp: use '|=' for csd

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]

Date:	Mon, 22 Apr 2013 08:49:10 +0200
From:	Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek@...il.com>
To:	li guang <lig.fnst@...fujitsu.com>
Cc:	tglx@...utronix.de, peterz@...radead.org,
	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, shli@...ionio.com,
	srivatsa.bhat@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, suresh.b.siddha@...el.com,
	fweisbec@...il.com, paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] smp: use '|=' for csd_lock

On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 8:30 AM, Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek@...il.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 8:22 AM, li guang <lig.fnst@...fujitsu.com> wrote:
>> 在 2013-04-22一的 08:18 +0200，Sedat Dilek写道：
>>> On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 7:47 AM, liguang <lig.fnst@...fujitsu.com> wrote:
>>> > originally, 'data->flags = CSD_FLAG_LOCK',
>>> > and we use 'data->flags &= ~CSD_FLAG_LOCK'
>>> > for csd_unlock, they are not symmetrix operations
>>> > so use '|=' instead of '='.
>>> > though, now data->flags only hold CSD_FLAG_LOCK,
>>> > it's not so meaningful to use '|=' to set 1 bit,
>>> > and '&= ~' to clear 1 bit.
>>> >
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> what's the reason I got CCed on this two patches? The ipc-sem-next
>>> issue I reported?
>>

NOPE.
( I tried next-20130419 with 3 ipc-sem-next patches plus your two patches. )

- Sedat -

>> sorry,
>> just use the result of scripts/get_maintainer.pl
>>
>
> Hmm, really this script memyselfandI as a result?
>
>>>
>>> Against what tree are those patches?
>>> They are not compatible with Linux-Next (next-20130419).
>>
>> main
>>
>
> Andrew renamed data/csd,so it's only 1/2 needing a refresh.
> Testing...
>
> Regards,
> - Sedat -
>
>>>
>>> Thanks.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> - Sedat -
>>>
>>> [1] http://marc.info/?t=136631457900005&r=1&w=2
>>>
>>> > Signed-off-by: liguang <lig.fnst@...fujitsu.com>
>>> > ---
>>> >  kernel/smp.c |    2 +-
>>> >  1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>>> >
>>> > diff --git a/kernel/smp.c b/kernel/smp.c
>>> > index 1818dc0..2d5deb4 100644
>>> > --- a/kernel/smp.c
>>> > +++ b/kernel/smp.c
>>> > @@ -109,7 +109,7 @@ static void csd_lock_wait(struct call_single_data *data)
>>> >  static void csd_lock(struct call_single_data *data)
>>> >  {
>>> >         csd_lock_wait(data);
>>> > -       data->flags = CSD_FLAG_LOCK;
>>> > +       data->flags |= CSD_FLAG_LOCK;
>>> >
>>> >         /*
>>> >          * prevent CPU from reordering the above assignment
>>> > --
>>> > 1.7.2.5
>>> >
>>
>>
--
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/