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: <20180718095420.GA28377@nautica>
Date:   Wed, 18 Jul 2018 11:54:20 +0200
From:   Dominique Martinet <asmadeus@...ewreck.org>
To:     piaojun <piaojun@...wei.com>
Cc:     "akpm@...ux-foundation.org" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Eric Van Hensbergen <ericvh@...il.com>,
        Ron Minnich <rminnich@...dia.gov>,
        Latchesar Ionkov <lucho@...kov.net>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        v9fs-developer@...ts.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net/9p/trans_virtio.c: replace mutex_lock with spin_lock
 to protect 'virtio_chan_list'

piaojun wrote on Wed, Jul 18, 2018:
> spin_lock is more effective for short time protection than mutex_lock, as
> mutex lock may cause process sleep and wake up which consume much cpu
> time.

That's not a fast path operation, I don't mind changing things but I'd
like to understand why - these functions are only ever called at unmount
time or when something happens on the virtio bus (probe will happen on
probing on the pci bus and I'm not too sure on remove but probably pci
removal i.e. basically never?)

I don't see why this wouldn't work, but I won't take this without a
(good?) reason.

-- 
Dominique Martinet

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ