linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] arch,locking: Ciao arch_mutex_cpu

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:	Wed, 25 Jun 2014 08:25:11 +0200
From:	Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>
To:	Davidlohr Bueso <davidlohr@...com>
Cc:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Aswin Chandramouleeswaran <aswin@...com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arch,locking: Ciao arch_mutex_cpu_relax()

On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 08:06:55AM -0700, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
> On Mon, 2014-06-23 at 08:58 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > While I like the general idea; does anyone have a better name for this?
> > So in particular, the difference is that on s390:
> > 
> >  cpu_relax()                - yields the vcpu
> >  arch_{,mutex_}cpu_relax()  - will actually spin-wait
> 
> iirc Heiko had suggested cpu_relax_simple() in the past. I don't think
> it's any better or worse than arch_cpu_relax(). For s390
> cpu_relax_noyield() would perhaps be suitable, but not very descriptive
> for the rest of the archs. I'm really lacking creativity for this name.

Maybe cpu_relax_spin() ? However that doesn't sound much better as well.

--
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/