linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] gpio: use a mutex to protect the list of GPIO devices

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: <CACRpkdb49rYZoXG5oDLvoDZ90BgpubpC7jRp=7L5qsk=ipPqyg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 28 Nov 2023 16:05:54 +0100
From:   Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
To:     Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl>
Cc:     Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
        Kent Gibson <warthog618@...il.com>, linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] gpio: use a mutex to protect the list of GPIO devices

On Tue, Nov 28, 2023 at 3:52 PM Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl> wrote:

> We don't need to lock the GPIO device or chip separately - the
> descriptor structs will stay alive as long as there's a live reference
> to the GPIO device. GPIO device will have an SRCU cookie for
> protecting API calls against removal of the chip.
>
> To summarize: one mutex for the GPIO device list, one lock per GPIO
> descriptor and SRCU protection of the GPIO device's chip.
>
> Does it make sense?

Absolutely, standing by to review, it's gonna look awesome!

Linus