linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] infiniband: i40iw: replace atomic_add

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: <20201201161441.GG5487@ziepe.ca>
Date:   Tue, 1 Dec 2020 12:14:41 -0400
From:   Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>
To:     "Saleem, Shiraz" <shiraz.saleem@...el.com>
Cc:     Yejune Deng <yejune.deng@...il.com>,
        "Latif, Faisal" <faisal.latif@...el.com>,
        "dledford@...hat.com" <dledford@...hat.com>,
        "linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org" <linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] infiniband: i40iw: replace atomic_add_return()

On Tue, Dec 01, 2020 at 02:42:25PM +0000, Saleem, Shiraz wrote:

> >  	case I40IW_CM_STATE_ESTABLISHED:
> >  	case I40IW_CM_STATE_SYN_RCVD:
> > @@ -3020,7 +3020,7 @@ static int i40iw_cm_reject(struct i40iw_cm_node
> > *cm_node, const void *pdata, u8
> >  	i40iw_cleanup_retrans_entry(cm_node);
> > 
> >  	if (!loopback) {
> > -		passive_state = atomic_add_return(1, &cm_node->passive_state);
> > +		passive_state = atomic_inc_return(&cm_node->passive_state);
> 
> Fine with it as its consistent across i40iw. But aren't there many
> more instances of this across the tree?  Isn't this a choice best
> left to the developer?

I don't think it is a style choice, the narrowest applicable atomic
should always be used as a matter of clarity and performance.

Jason