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
| ||
|
Date: Sun, 31 Jul 2016 10:18:29 +0000 From: "Levy, Amir (Jer)" <amir.jer.levy@...el.com> To: Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, Stephen Hemminger <stephen@...workplumber.org> CC: "andreas.noever@...il.com" <andreas.noever@...il.com>, "bhelgaas@...gle.com" <bhelgaas@...gle.com>, "corbet@....net" <corbet@....net>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, "linux-pci@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>, "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, "linux-doc@...r.kernel.org" <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>, thunderbolt-linux <thunderbolt-linux@...el.com>, "Westerberg, Mika" <mika.westerberg@...el.com>, "Winkler, Tomas" <tomas.winkler@...el.com> Subject: RE: [PATCH v5 4/8] thunderbolt: Communication with the ICM (firmware) On Sat, Jul 30 2016, 12:48 AM, Greg KH wrote: > On Fri, Jul 29, 2016 at 02:02:24PM -0700, Stephen Hemminger wrote: > > On Thu, 28 Jul 2016 11:15:17 +0300 > > Amir Levy <amir.jer.levy@...el.com> wrote: > > > > > +static LIST_HEAD(controllers_list); static > > > +DECLARE_RWSEM(controllers_list_rwsem); > > > > Why use a semaphore when simple spinlock or mutex would be better? > > And never use a RW semaphore unless you can benchmark the difference > from a normal lock. If you can't benchmark it, then don't use it... I used RW semaphore since most of the time the list will be accessed for read. Since it is used in non-time sensitive flows, I'll change it to mutex.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists