linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 6/6] regulator: core: simplify lock

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:   Mon, 21 Aug 2023 09:51:08 -0700
From:   Doug Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>
To:     Michał Mirosław <mirq-linux@...e.qmqm.pl>
Cc:     Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
        Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Dmitry Osipenko <digetx@...il.com>,
        Stephen Boyd <swboyd@...omium.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/6] regulator: core: simplify lock_two()

Hi,

On Sat, Aug 19, 2023 at 3:46 PM Michał Mirosław <mirq-linux@...e.qmqm.pl> wrote:
>
> Make regulator_lock_two() shorter by observing that we have only two
> locks and when swapped earlier the retry code becomes identical to the
> normal (optimistic) path.
>
> Signed-off-by: Michał Mirosław <mirq-linux@...e.qmqm.pl>
> ---
>  drivers/regulator/core.c | 28 ++++++++++------------------
>  1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)

This is quite nearly a direct revert of commit 37473397b852
("regulator: core: Make regulator_lock_two() logic easier to follow"),
which was requested by Stephen in:

https://lore.kernel.org/r/CAE-0n53Eb1BeDPmjBycXUaQAF4ppiAM6UDWje_jiB9GAmR8MMw@mail.gmail.com

I don't personally have a strong opinion, but do prefer not to flip-flop. ;-)


-Doug