linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH v2 3/5] futex: Throughput-optimized (TO) futexes

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: <57E3D6E7.6070203@hpe.com>
Date:   Thu, 22 Sep 2016 09:04:39 -0400
From:   Waiman Long <waiman.long@....com>
To:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
CC:     Mike Galbraith <umgwanakikbuti@...il.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
        Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net>,
        Jason Low <jason.low2@....com>,
        Scott J Norton <scott.norton@....com>,
        Douglas Hatch <doug.hatch@....com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 3/5] futex: Throughput-optimized (TO) futexes

On 09/22/2016 03:49 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 07:37:34PM -0400, Waiman Long wrote:
>> On 09/21/2016 02:59 AM, Mike Galbraith wrote:
>>> On Tue, 2016-09-20 at 09:42 -0400, Waiman Long wrote:
>>>> This patch introduces a new futex implementation called
>>>> throughput-optimized (TO) futexes.
>>> nit: 'TO' sounds way too much like timeout... TP?  You even use 'to' as
>>> shorthand for timeout in the next patch.
>> I agree. I am not that satisfied with the TO name. So I will change it to TP
>> in my next revision of the patch. Thanks for the suggestion.
> I'd leave out the TO part entirely (or only mention it in changelogs).
>
> That is, I'd call the futex ops: FUTEX_LOCK and FUTEX_UNLOCK.

I was following the convention for the PI futexes where we have 
FUTEX_LOCK_PI and FUTEX_UNLOCK_PI. If you think it is OK to promote this 
new futex as default for mutex type locks and use the PI futexes only 
when needed, I am certainly OK to drop the suffix.

Cheers,
Longman