linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 06/13] lockdep: Implement crossrelease feature

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20170301061804.GF11663@X58A-UD3R>
Date:   Wed, 1 Mar 2017 15:18:04 +0900
From:   Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@....com>
To:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
CC:     <mingo@...nel.org>, <tglx@...utronix.de>, <walken@...gle.com>,
        <boqun.feng@...il.com>, <kirill@...temov.name>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        <iamjoonsoo.kim@....com>, <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        <npiggin@...il.com>, <kernel-team@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 06/13] lockdep: Implement crossrelease feature

On Wed, Mar 01, 2017 at 02:17:07PM +0900, Byungchul Park wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 04:49:00PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 10:17:32PM +0900, Byungchul Park wrote:
> > 
> > > +struct cross_lock {
> > > +	/*
> > > +	 * When more than one acquisition of crosslocks are overlapped,
> > > +	 * we do actual commit only when ref == 0.
> > > +	 */
> > > +	atomic_t ref;
> > 
> > That comment doesn't seem right, should that be: ref != 0 ?
> > Also; would it not be much clearer to call this: nr_blocked, or waiters
> > or something along those lines, because that is what it appears to be.

Honestly, I forgot why I introduced the ref.. I will remove the ref next
spin, and handle waiters in another way.

Thank you,
Byungchul