linux-kernel - Re: [RFT][PATCH] ACPI: OSL: Use rwlock instead of RCU for memory management

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:   Sat, 6 Jun 2020 08:48:05 +0200
From:   "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>
To:     Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
Cc:     "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
        Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>,
        Stable <stable@...r.kernel.org>, Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>,
        Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
        Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@...el.com>,
        James Morse <james.morse@....com>,
        Erik Kaneda <erik.kaneda@...el.com>,
        Myron Stowe <myron.stowe@...hat.com>,
        Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        ACPI Devel Maling List <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-nvdimm@...ts.01.org" <linux-nvdimm@...ts.01.org>
Subject: Re: [RFT][PATCH] ACPI: OSL: Use rwlock instead of RCU for memory management

On Fri, Jun 5, 2020 at 9:40 PM Andy Shevchenko
<andy.shevchenko@...il.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jun 5, 2020 at 5:11 PM Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@...ysocki.net> wrote:
>
> ...
>
> > +       if (!refcount) {
> > +               write_lock_irq(&acpi_ioremaps_list_lock);
> > +
> > +               list_del(&map->list);
> > +
> > +               write_unlock_irq(&acpi_ioremaps_list_lock);
> > +       }
> >         return refcount;
>
> It seems we can decrease indentation level at the same time:
>
>   if (refcount)
>     return refcount;
>
>  ...
>  return 0;

Right, but the patch will need to be dropped anyway I think.