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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <ZXumIX39JRpbYrbw@rigel> Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2023 09:04:33 +0800 From: Kent Gibson <warthog618@...il.com> To: Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl> Cc: Andy Shevchenko <andy@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org, linus.walleij@...aro.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/5] gpiolib: cdev: relocate debounce_period_us from struct gpio_desc On Thu, Dec 14, 2023 at 10:06:14PM +0100, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote: > On Thu, Dec 14, 2023 at 5:41 PM Andy Shevchenko <andy@...nel.org> wrote: > > > > On Fri, Dec 15, 2023 at 12:14:41AM +0800, Kent Gibson wrote: > > > On Thu, Dec 14, 2023 at 05:09:01PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > > > On Thu, Dec 14, 2023 at 05:03:03PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > > > > On Thu, Dec 14, 2023 at 05:58:11PM +0800, Kent Gibson wrote: > > > > ... > > > > > > > > +static void supinfo_init(void) > > > > > > +{ > > > > > > + supinfo.tree = RB_ROOT; > > > > > > + spin_lock_init(&supinfo.lock); > > > > > > +} > > > > > > > > > > Can it be done statically? > > > > > > > > > > supinfo = { > > > > > .tree = RB_ROOT, > > > > > .lock = __SPIN_LOCK_UNLOCKED(supinfo.lock), > > Double underscore typically means it's private and shouldn't be used. > You mean like __assign_bit(), __set_bit(), __clear_bit() and __free() - all used in gpiolib.c? > > > > > > > > I even checked the current tree, we have 32 users of this pattern in drivers/. > > > > > > Ah, that is what you meant. Yeah sure can - the supinfo_init() is > > > another hangover from when I was trying to create the supinfo per chip, > > > but now it is a global a static initialiser makes sense. > > > > Yep, the DEFINE_MUTEX() / DEFINE_SPINLOCK() / etc looks better naturally > > than above. > > Yeah, so maybe we should use non-struct, global variables after all. > Despite the 32 cases cited that already use that pattern? 9 of which use __SPIN_LOCK_UNLOCKED(). Sounds like a pretty convincing argument to use the struct ;-). But lets keep it as kosher as possible and split out the struct :-(. Cheers, Kent.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists