linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH] bit_spinlock: introduce smp_cond_load

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: <20181013070420.GA29914@kroah.com>
Date:   Sat, 13 Oct 2018 09:04:20 +0200
From:   Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     Gao Xiang <hsiangkao@....com>
Cc:     Philippe Ombredanne <pombredanne@...b.com>,
        Kate Stewart <kstewart@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Miao Xie <miaoxie@...wei.com>,
        Chao Yu <chao@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] bit_spinlock: introduce smp_cond_load_relaxed

On Sat, Oct 13, 2018 at 02:47:29PM +0800, Gao Xiang wrote:
> It is better to use smp_cond_load_relaxed instead
> of busy waiting for bit_spinlock.

Why?  I think we need some kind of "proof" that this is true before
being able to accept a patch like this, don't you agree?

thanks,

greg k-h