linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH net-next v2 2/3] r8152: clear theflagofSCHEDULE

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: <0835B3720019904CB8F7AA43166CEEB2ECD9F4@RTITMBSV03.realtek.com.tw>
Date:	Mon, 3 Nov 2014 12:35:29 +0000
From:	Hayes Wang <hayeswang@...ltek.com>
To:	Francois Romieu <romieu@...zoreil.com>
CC:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
	"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	nic_swsd <nic_swsd@...ltek.com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-usb@...r.kernel.org" <linux-usb@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH net-next v2 2/3] r8152: clear theflagofSCHEDULE_TASKLETin tasklet

 Francois Romieu [mailto:romieu@...zoreil.com] 
[...]
> test_and_clear_bit (dense) or clear_bit would be more idiomatic.

Excuse me. If I use clear_bit without test_bit or test_and_clear_bit,
they alwayes call the spin lock. However, for my original flow, the spin
lock is only called when the clear_bit is necessary. Is that better?
 
Best Regards,
Hayes
--
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/