linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] mutex: Remove ww_ctx unlikely() from __mutex_lock

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Thu, 19 Jan 2017 11:50:06 -0500
From:   Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:     LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Chris Wilson <chris@...is-wilson.co.uk>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mutex: Remove ww_ctx unlikely() from
 __mutex_lock_common()

On Thu, 19 Jan 2017 17:42:52 +0100
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:

> On Thu, Jan 19, 2017 at 08:54:41AM -0500, Steven Rostedt (VMware) wrote:
> > I added a comment stating that the branch should be unlikely, but due
> > to the intel drm logic, it currently isn't. Then if drm changes in the
> > future, we could then try it again.  
> 
> I really don't see the point here. The unlikely() also conveys this is
> not a fast path branch and that is still true, regardsless of what
> runtime does.

Fair enough.

> 
> Also, the patch wouldn't apply even if I were so inclined.

Probably because I created it against the ancient 4.9-rc7 kernel ;-)

-- Steve