linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 02/14] dmaengine: tegra-apb: Implement synchronization callback

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]

Message-ID: <627f996c-1487-1b9a-e953-f5737f3ad32a@gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 15 Jan 2020 00:02:22 +0300
From:   Dmitry Osipenko <digetx@...il.com>
To:     Jon Hunter <jonathanh@...dia.com>,
        Laxman Dewangan <ldewangan@...dia.com>,
        Vinod Koul <vkoul@...nel.org>,
        Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
        Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>,
        Michał Mirosław <mirq-linux@...e.qmqm.pl>
Cc:     dmaengine@...r.kernel.org, linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 02/14] dmaengine: tegra-apb: Implement synchronization
 callback

14.01.2020 18:15, Jon Hunter пишет:
> 
> On 12/01/2020 17:29, Dmitry Osipenko wrote:
>> The ISR tasklet could be kept scheduled after DMA transfer termination,
>> let's add synchronization callback which blocks until tasklet is finished.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Dmitry Osipenko <digetx@...il.com>
>> ---
>>  drivers/dma/tegra20-apb-dma.c | 8 ++++++++
>>  1 file changed, 8 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/dma/tegra20-apb-dma.c b/drivers/dma/tegra20-apb-dma.c
>> index 319f31d27014..664e9c5df3ba 100644
>> --- a/drivers/dma/tegra20-apb-dma.c
>> +++ b/drivers/dma/tegra20-apb-dma.c
>> @@ -798,6 +798,13 @@ static int tegra_dma_terminate_all(struct dma_chan *dc)
>>  	return 0;
>>  }
>>  
>> +static void tegra_dma_synchronize(struct dma_chan *dc)
>> +{
>> +	struct tegra_dma_channel *tdc = to_tegra_dma_chan(dc);
>> +
>> +	tasklet_kill(&tdc->tasklet);
>> +}
>> +
> 
> Wouldn't there need to be some clean-up here? If the tasklet is
> scheduled, seems that there would be some other house-keeping that needs
> to be done after killing it.

I'm not seeing anything to clean-up, could you please clarify?