linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RFC v2 1/2] hwspinlock: Introduce raw capability for hwspinlocks

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: <55771B86.4050708@codeaurora.org>
Date:	Tue, 09 Jun 2015 10:59:50 -0600
From:	Jeffrey Hugo <jhugo@...eaurora.org>
To:	Lina Iyer <lina.iyer@...aro.org>, ohad@...ery.com
CC:	linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Andy Gross <agross@...eaurora.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC v2 1/2] hwspinlock: Introduce raw capability for hwspinlocks

Two minor nits I noticed.

On 6/9/2015 10:23 AM, Lina Iyer wrote:
> The hwspinlock framework, uses a s/w spin lock around the hw spinlock to
> ensure that only process acquires the lock at any time. This is the most

Should this be "ensure that only one process"?

<snip>

> Introduce hwcaps member for hwspinlock_device. The hwcaps represents the

Technically you added it to the hwspinlock struct, not 
hwspinlock_device.  Mentioning that the hwcaps member was added to 
hwspinlock_device in the description here may be slightly confusing.

-- 
Jeffrey Hugo
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the 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 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/