linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3] powerpc: spinlock: Fix spin_unlock

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: <20160608123507.GR30154@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date:	Wed, 8 Jun 2016 14:35:07 +0200
From:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:	Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>
Cc:	linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
	Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
	Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] powerpc: spinlock: Fix spin_unlock_wait()

On Wed, Jun 08, 2016 at 09:20:45PM +1000, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> On Mon, 2016-06-06 at 16:46 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 06, 2016 at 10:17:25PM +1000, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> > > On Mon, 2016-06-06 at 13:56 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Jun 06, 2016 at 09:42:20PM +1000, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > Why the move to in-line this implementation? It looks like a fairly big
> > > > function.
> > > 
> > > I agree it's not pretty.
> > 
> > > I'm not beholden to v3 though if you hate it.
> > 
> > I don't mind; its just that I am in a similar boat with qspinlock and
> > chose the other option. So I just figured I'd ask :-)
> 
> OK. I'll go with inline and we'll see which version gets "cleaned-up" by a
> janitor first ;)

Ok; what tree does this go in? I have this dependent series which I'd
like to get sorted and merged somewhere.