linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/1] s390/cio: make sch->lock a spinlock (is a pointer)

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <your-ad-here.call-01699391666-ext-4064@work.hours>
Date:   Tue, 7 Nov 2023 22:14:26 +0100
From:   Vasily Gorbik <gor@...ux.ibm.com>
To:     Vineeth Vijayan <vneethv@...ux.ibm.com>
Cc:     Halil Pasic <pasic@...ux.ibm.com>,
        Peter Oberparleiter <oberpar@...ux.ibm.com>,
        Heiko Carstens <hca@...ux.ibm.com>,
        Alexander Gordeev <agordeev@...ux.ibm.com>,
        Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ux.ibm.com>,
        Sven Schnelle <svens@...ux.ibm.com>,
        Eric Farman <farman@...ux.ibm.com>,
        Matthew Rosato <mjrosato@...ux.ibm.com>,
        linux-s390@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        kvm@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] s390/cio: make sch->lock a spinlock (is a pointer)

On Tue, Nov 07, 2023 at 01:39:00PM +0100, Vineeth Vijayan wrote:
> 
> 
> On 11/1/23 12:57, Halil Pasic wrote:
> > The lock member of struct subchannel used to be a spinlock, but became
> > a pointer to a spinlock with commit 2ec2298412e1 ("[S390] subchannel
> > lock conversion."). This might have been justified back then, but with
> > the current state of affairs, there is no reason to manage a separate
> > spinlock object.
> > 
> > Let's simplify things and pull the spinlock back into struct subchannel.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Halil Pasic<pasic@...ux.ibm.com>
> > ---
> > I know it is a lot of churn, but I do believe in the end it does make
> > the code more maintainable.
> 
> You are right. Makes the code easy to read and a bit less complex.
> Looks good to me. Thanks
> 
> Reviewed-by: Vineeth Vijayan <vneethv@...ux.ibm.com>

Applied, thank you.