linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] firmware: wake all waiters

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: <CAB=NE6VSR2Q38xz8vCUNsgUAo770_5pDZy04yZ5LpOCvum0FUg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 29 Jun 2017 12:48:43 -0700
From:   "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@...nel.org>
To:     Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net>,
        Matthew Wilcox <mawilcox@...rosoft.com>
Cc:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        DanielWagnerwagi@...om.org, Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>,
        Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@...hat.com>,
        Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@...driver.com>,
        Ming Lei <ming.lei@...hat.com>,
        "Li, Yi" <yi1.li@...ux.intel.com>,
        "AKASHI, Takahiro" <takahiro.akashi@...aro.org>,
        Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@...ronome.com>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
        Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>,
        Andrew Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
        David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
        Alan Cox <alan@...ux.intel.com>,
        "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>, oss-drivers@...ronome.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] firmware: wake all waiters

On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 12:08 PM, Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net> wrote:
> On Tue, 27 Jun 2017, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
>>
>>  * As a side effect of this; the data structures are slimmer.
>>  *
>> - * One would recommend using this wait queue where possible.
>> + * NOTE: swait is for cases of extreme memory considerations and some
>> very
>> + * special realtime issues, where it saves a couple of bytes in
>> structures that
>> + * need close packing. As such its very special-use. Consider using
>> regular
>> + * waits queues from wait.h instead *first*.
>
>
> How about the following?

And do we want to make it even more *special-use* by wrapping it with
#ifndef MODULE as suggested by Matthew Wilcox ?

  Luis