linux-kernel - Re: [patch V2 07/50] posix-cpu-timers: Split up posix_cpu_timer

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: Fri, 12 Apr 2024 21:48:23 +0200
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Anna-Maria Behnsen
 <anna-maria@...utronix.de>, Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>,
 John Stultz <jstultz@...gle.com>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
 Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>, Oleg
 Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [patch V2 07/50] posix-cpu-timers: Split up posix_cpu_timer_get()

On Fri, Apr 12 2024 at 13:25, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de> writes:
>> In preparation for addressing issues in the timer_get() and timer_set()
>> functions of posix CPU timers.
>
> To see that this was safe I had to lookup and see that
> cpu_timer_getexpires is a truly trivial function.
>
> static inline u64 cpu_timer_getexpires(struct cpu_timer *ctmr)
> {
> 	return ctmr->node.expires;
> }
>
> I am a bit confused by the purpose of this function in
> posix-cpu-timers.c.

I added that back then when I converted the code over to use a
timerqueue instead of a linked list mostly because I did not want to
fiddle in the inwars of timerqueue.

> In some places this helper is used (like below), and in other places
> like bump_cpu_timer the expires member is accessed directly.
>
> It isn't really a problem, but it is something that might be
> worth making consistent in the code to make it easier to read.

Yes, that's definitely inconsistent. I'll have a look.

Thanks,

        tglx