linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 2/5] irqchip: sifive-plic: Don't inline plic_toggle() and plic_irq

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:   Mon, 11 Feb 2019 23:09:25 -0800
From:   Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To:     Anup Patel <anup@...infault.org>
Cc:     Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...ive.com>,
        Albert Ou <aou@...s.berkeley.edu>,
        Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Jason Cooper <jason@...edaemon.net>,
        Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@....com>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
        Atish Patra <atish.patra@....com>,
        linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 2/5] irqchip: sifive-plic: Don't inline plic_toggle()
 and plic_irq_toggle()

On Sat, Jan 19, 2019 at 11:26:22AM +0530, Anup Patel wrote:
> The plic_toggle() uses raw_spin_lock() and plic_irq_toggle has a
> for loop so both these functions are not suitable for being inline
> hence this patch removes the inline keyword.

I still very much disagree.  Very strongly with the above rationale,
but also (less strongly) with the decision not to inline here.