linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1 1/4] spidev: Do not use atomic bit operations when allocating minor

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: <YjtvsYs+x3LRaLVP@sirena.org.uk>
Date:   Wed, 23 Mar 2022 19:06:25 +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 07:22:52PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 23, 2022 at 04:39:01PM +0000, Mark Brown wrote:

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

> It's exactly what is written in the commit message

> __*_bit() are non-atomic
> *_bit() are atomic

> Since they are wrapped by mutex, the atomic ones are not needed.

Yes, it's not needed but what meaningful harm does it do?

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