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  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]
Date:   Wed, 1 Nov 2017 18:01:10 -0400
From:   Boris Ostrovsky <>
To:     Waiman Long <>,
        Thomas Gleixner <>,
        Ingo Molnar <>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <>, Jonathan Corbet <>
Cc:,,,,, Juergen Gross <>,
        Alok Kataria <>,
        Rusty Russell <>,
        Paolo Bonzini <>,
        Radim Krčmář <>,
        Peter Zijlstra <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH-tip v2 2/2] x86/xen: Deprecate xen_nopvspin

On 11/01/2017 04:58 PM, Waiman Long wrote:
> +/* TODO: To be removed in a future kernel version */
>  static __init int xen_parse_nopvspin(char *arg)
>  {
> -	xen_pvspin = false;
> +	pr_warn("xen_nopvspin is deprecated, replace it with \"pvlock_type=queued\"!\n");
> +	if (!pv_spinlock_type)
> +		pv_spinlock_type = locktype_queued;

Since we currently end up using unfair locks and because you are
deprecating xen_nopvspin I wonder whether it would be better to set this
to locktype_unfair so that current behavior doesn't change. (Sorry, I
haven't responded to your earlier message before you posted this). Juergen?

I am also not sure I agree with making pv_spinlock an enum *and* a
bitmask at the same time. I understand that it makes checks easier but I
think not assuming a value or a pattern would be better, especially
since none of the uses is on a critical path.

(For example, !pv_spinlock_type is the same as locktype_auto, which is
defined but never used)


>  	return 0;
>  }
>  early_param("xen_nopvspin", xen_parse_nopvspin);
> -

Powered by blists - more mailing lists