linux-kernel - Re: [v2] memory/samsung: reduce unnecessary mutex lock area

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: <113c5695-5415-03f2-c99a-b394b3118d33@arm.com>
Date:   Tue, 12 May 2020 13:48:23 +0100
From:   Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@....com>
To:     Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@....de>,
        Bernard Zhao <bernard@...o.com>,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, opensource.kernel@...o.com,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>,
        Kukjin Kim <kgene@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [v2] memory/samsung: reduce unnecessary mutex lock area



On 5/12/20 1:32 PM, Markus Elfring wrote:
>> Something like: 'memory/samsung: reduce protected code area in IRQ
>> handler' for the subject header would be better.
>> Then in the message explain (without 'maybe') that it will speed-up a
>> bit this IRQ processing and there is no need to protect return value
>> or printing.
> 
> Do you tend to prefer smaller lock scopes for nicer run time characteristics?

Yes and I am probably not the only one. Of course it consumes time, to
make and test this kind of changes (so it must be in my current scope
of work).

Regards,
Lukasz

> 
> Regards,
> Markus
>