linux-kernel - Re: spin_lock instead of spin_lock

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20180826170430.GA12776@kroah.com>
Date:   Sun, 26 Aug 2018 19:04:30 +0200
From:   Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     QIANJUN <hangdianqj@....com>
Cc:     jslaby@...e.com, linux-serial@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: spin_lock instead of spin_lock_irqsave in imx uart interuput

On Sun, Aug 26, 2018 at 08:00:42AM -0700, QIANJUN wrote:
> spin_lock instead of spin_lock_irqsave in imx uart interuput

What does that mean?

> >From 6580790d7be51a78d1376b90df49b04019a1f944 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: jun qian <hangdianqj@....com>
> Date: Sun, 26 Aug 2018 06:58:35 -0700
> Subject: [PATCH] before the programe into the uart interuput's handler, the
>  system has already disabled the local cpu interuput. so the spin_lock
>  interface is More suitable for here.

Why is this here?  The changelog text belongs in the changelog, not in
the subject line :(

can you fix this all up and resend?

thanks,

greg k-h