linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] locking: Document the semantics of spin_is

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: <3766.1522768987@warthog.procyon.org.uk>
Date:   Tue, 03 Apr 2018 16:23:07 +0100
From:   David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
To:     Andrea Parri <andrea.parri@...rulasolutions.com>
Cc:     dhowells@...hat.com, paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Andrea Parri <parri.andrea@...il.com>,
        Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>,
        Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
        Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>,
        Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@...il.com>,
        Jade Alglave <j.alglave@....ac.uk>,
        Luc Maranget <luc.maranget@...ia.fr>,
        Akira Yokosawa <akiyks@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] locking: Document the semantics of spin_is_locked()

Andrea Parri <andrea.parri@...rulasolutions.com> wrote:

> Sorry, but I don't understand your objection: are you suggesting to add
> something like "Always return 0 on !SMP" to the comment?  what else?

Something like that, possibly along with a warning that this might not be what
you want.  You might actually want it to return true on !SMP, it depends on
what you're using it for.

David