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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Thu, 10 Nov 2022 14:01:49 +0100
From:   "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>
To:     Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
Cc:     "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
        Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>,
        Amit Kucheria <amitk@...nel.org>,
        Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@...el.com>, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/9] thermal/core: Introduce locked version of thermal_zone_device_update

On Thu, Nov 10, 2022 at 1:25 AM Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Nov 09, 2022 at 08:15:17PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 17, 2022 at 3:09 PM Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net> wrote:
> > >
> > > In thermal_zone_device_set_mode(), the thermal zone mutex is released only
> > > to be reacquired in the subsequent call to thermal_zone_device_update().
> > >
> > > Introduce __thermal_zone_device_update() as locked version of
> >
> > Did you mean "unlocked"?
> >
> No, I did mean "locked", as in "must be called with thermal zone device
> mutex acquired".
>
> locked:
>
> void __thermal_zone_device_update(struct thermal_zone_device *tz,
>                                   enum thermal_notify_event event)
> {
>         ...
> }
>
> unlocked:
>
> void thermal_zone_device_update(struct thermal_zone_device *tz,
>                                 enum thermal_notify_event event)
> {
>         mutex_lock(&tz->lock);
>         if (device_is_registered(&tz->device))
>                 __thermal_zone_device_update(tz, event);
>         mutex_unlock(&tz->lock);
> }

Thanks for the explanation.

> Should I phrase or explain it differently ?

I would rather say "bare" or something like that so it is all clear to
people like me, but it is your call.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ