linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/5] clk: Don't hold prepare_lock when calling kref

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: <CAD=FV=Wu_SuLcHYQ1bLC-zhV1FnoFor84t-=EERT9mnDdm5Q2A@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Mar 2024 09:19:02 -0700
From: Doug Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>
To: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>
Cc: Michael Turquette <mturquette@...libre.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, 
	linux-clk@...r.kernel.org, patches@...ts.linux.dev, 
	linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/5] clk: Don't hold prepare_lock when calling kref_put()

Hi,

On Sun, Mar 24, 2024 at 10:44 PM Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> We don't need to hold the prepare_lock when dropping a ref on a struct
> clk_core. The release function is only freeing memory and any code with
> a pointer reference has already unlinked anything pointing to the
> clk_core. This reduces the holding area of the prepare_lock a bit.
>
> Note that we also don't call free_clk() with the prepare_lock held.
> There isn't any reason to do that.
>
> Cc: Douglas Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>
> Signed-off-by: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>
> ---
>  drivers/clk/clk.c | 12 +++++-------
>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)

Reviewed-by: Douglas Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>