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: <YjtNJe4Pgp3WIwOa@sirena.org.uk>
Date:   Wed, 23 Mar 2022 16:39:01 +0000
From:   Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To:     Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
Cc:     linux-spi@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/4] spidev: Do not use atomic bit operations when
 allocating minor

On Wed, Mar 23, 2022 at 04:02:12PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> There is no need to use atomic bit operations when allocating a minor
> number since it's done under a mutex. Moreover, one of the operations
> that is in use is non-atomic anyway.

>  	if (status == 0) {
> -		set_bit(minor, minors);
> +		__set_bit(minor, minors);
>  		list_add(&spidev->device_entry, &device_list);

There's no *need* but the __ looks suspicious...  what's the upside
here?

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (489 bytes)

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ