linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] sched: Add schedule_(raw_)spin_unlock and schedule_(raw_)spin_unlock

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:	Tue, 18 Jun 2013 19:28:05 +0200
From:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:	Kirill Tkhai <tkhai@...dex.ru>
Cc:	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] sched: Add schedule_(raw_)spin_unlock and
 schedule_(raw_)spin_unlock_irq

On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 07:36:52PM +0400, Kirill Tkhai wrote:
> Helpers for replacement repeating patterns:
> 
> 1)spin_unlock(lock);
>   schedule();
> 2)spin_unlock_irq(lock);
>   schedule();
> 

I just noticed this; the existing schedule_preempt_disabled() is
equivalent to:

  preempt_enable()
  schedule()
  preempt_disable()

So I somewhat expected these new primitives to be:

  spin_unlock()
  schedule()
  spin_lock()

Now I haven't actually looked at the usage patch to see what the
converted sites look like (thanks for adding that one though!).

My OCD just triggered on the preemption and locked schedule calls having
different semantics.
--
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/