| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <1401912696.13877.5.camel@buesod1.americas.hpqcorp.net> Date: Wed, 04 Jun 2014 13:11:36 -0700 From: Davidlohr Bueso <davidlohr@...com> To: Jason Low <jason.low2@...com> Cc: mingo@...nel.org, peterz@...radead.org, tglx@...utronix.de, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com, peter@...leysoftware.com, riel@...hat.com, hpa@...or.com, walken@...gle.com, Waiman.Long@...com, aswin@...com, scott.norton@...com, chegu_vinod@...com Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 2/3] locking/mutex: Correct documentation on mutex optimistic spinning On Wed, 2014-06-04 at 12:08 -0700, Jason Low wrote: > The mutex optimistic spinning documentation states that we spin for > acquisition when we find that there are no pending waiters. However, > in actuality, whether or not there are waiters for the mutex doesn't > determine if we will spin for it. > > This patch removes that statement and also adds a comment which > mentions that we spin for the mutex while we don't need to reschedule. > > Signed-off-by: Jason Low <jason.low2@...com> Acked-by: Davidlohr Bueso <davidlohr@...com> I think this could go in with v4 of the mutex doc rewrite patch... guessing for 3.17 now. Thanks, Davidlohr -- 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