linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH -v2 5/7] locking/percpu-rwsem: Remove the embedded rwsem

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, 3 Feb 2020 06:20:50 -0800
From:   Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:     mingo@...nel.org, will@...nel.org, oleg@...hat.com,
        tglx@...utronix.de, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        bigeasy@...utronix.de, juri.lelli@...hat.com, williams@...hat.com,
        bristot@...hat.com, longman@...hat.com, dave@...olabs.net,
        jack@...e.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH -v2 5/7] locking/percpu-rwsem: Remove the embedded rwsem

On Fri, Jan 31, 2020 at 04:07:08PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> @@ -53,12 +53,6 @@ struct rw_semaphore {
>  #endif
>  };
>  
> -/*
> - * Setting all bits of the owner field except bit 0 will indicate
> - * that the rwsem is writer-owned with an unknown owner.
> - */
> -#define RWSEM_OWNER_UNKNOWN	(-2L)

Can you split the removal of the non-owned resem support into a separate
patch?  I still think keeping this one and moving aio to that scheme is
a better idea than the current ad-hoc locking scheme that has all kinds
of issues.