linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] arm64: replace read_lock to rcu lock in call_step

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:	Tue, 9 Feb 2016 11:08:15 -0500
From:	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To:	Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>
Cc:	Yang Shi <yang.shi@...aro.org>, linaro-kernel@...ts.linaro.org,
	linux-rt-users@...r.kernel.org, catalin.marinas@....com,
	bigeasy@...utronix.de, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm64: replace read_lock to rcu lock in call_step_hook

On Tue, 9 Feb 2016 16:04:42 +0000
Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com> wrote:
 
> > The patch looks good to me. Do you want to take it through your tree?
> > 
> > It benefits mainline too as a rcu_read_lock() is more efficient than
> > rwlocks. Although I will say this is a slow path anyway.  
> 
> I was thinking that Catalin would queue it for 4.6 in the arm64 tree,
> since that's probably easiest in case any unlikely conflicts crop up.

Oh, OK.

That's fine. I just didn't want you to think that the RT folks were
going to pull it in for mainline.

-- Steve