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  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, 25 Nov 2014 17:27:38 -0800
From:	Stephen Boyd <>
To:	Daniel Thompson <>
CC:	Nicolas Pitre <>,
	Marc Zyngier <>,
	"" <>,
	Russell King <>,
	Jason Cooper <>,
	"" <>,
	"" <>,
	Daniel Drake <>,
	Dmitry Pervushin <>,
	Dirk Behme <>,
	John Stultz <>,
	Tim Sander <>,
	Thomas Gleixner <>,
	Sumit Semwal <>,
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3.18-rc3 v9 1/5] irqchip: gic: Finer grain locking for

On 11/25/2014 01:10 PM, Daniel Thompson wrote:
> On 25/11/14 20:17, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
>> On Tue, 25 Nov 2014, Marc Zyngier wrote:
>>> Hi Daniel,
>>> On 25/11/14 17:26, Daniel Thompson wrote:
>>>> irq_controller_lock is used for multiple purposes within the gic driver.
>>>> Primarily it is used to make register read-modify-write sequences atomic.
>>>> It is also used by gic_raise_softirq() in order that the big.LITTLE
>>>> migration logic can figure out when it is safe to migrate interrupts
>>>> between physical cores.
>>>> The second usage of irq_controller_lock is difficult to discern when
>>>> reviewing the code because the migration itself takes place outside
>>>> the lock.
>>>> This patch makes the second usage more explicit by splitting it out into
>>>> a separate lock and providing better comments.
>>> While we're at it, how about an additional patch that would make this
>>> lock disappear entirely when the big-little stuff is not compiled in,
>>> which is likely to be the case on a lot of (dare I say most?) systems?
>>> That will save expensive barriers that we definitely could do without.
>> For the record, I reviewed and ACKed a patch doing exactly that a while
>> ago:
> Well remembered! That patch had a different motivation but is very
> similar to mine... so much so I might steal bit of it.
> I'll make sure I put Stephen on Cc: when I respin with the changes Marc
> requested.

I don't get a random Cc here? :-)

Anyway, yes please let's merge that patch.

Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum,
a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists