linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 04/10] locking: export osq_lock()/osq

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]

Date:   Fri, 18 May 2018 13:08:08 +0200
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:     Kent Overstreet <kent.overstreet@...il.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Dave Chinner <dchinner@...hat.com>, darrick.wong@...cle.com,
        tytso@....edu, linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org, clm@...com,
        jbacik@...com, viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, willy@...radead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 04/10] locking: export osq_lock()/osq_unlock()

On Fri, May 18, 2018 at 06:18:04AM -0400, Kent Overstreet wrote:
> On Fri, May 18, 2018 at 11:52:04AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Fri, May 18, 2018 at 03:49:06AM -0400, Kent Overstreet wrote:
> > 
> > No.. and most certainly not without a _very_ good reason.
> 
> Ok, can I ask why?

Because it is an internal helper for lock implementations that want to
do optimistic spinning, it isn't a lock on its own and lacks several
things you would expect.

Using it is tricky and I don't trust random module authors to get 1+1
right, let alone use this thing correctly (no judgement on your code,
just in general).

> Here's what it's for:

I'll try and have a look soon :-) But does that really _have_ to live in
a module?