linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] ptp: remove ptp->n_vclocks check logic in ptp_vclock_in

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

Message-ID: <20250527104202.7fbb916c@kernel.org>
Date: Tue, 27 May 2025 10:42:02 -0700
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To: Jeongjun Park <aha310510@...il.com>
Cc: richardcochran@...il.com, andrew+netdev@...n.ch, davem@...emloft.net,
 edumazet@...gle.com, pabeni@...hat.com, yangbo.lu@....com,
 netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] ptp: remove ptp->n_vclocks check logic in
 ptp_vclock_in_use()

On Mon, 26 May 2025 20:00:53 +0900 Jeongjun Park wrote:
> If you need to check n_vclocks when checking
> whether ptp virtual clock is in use, it means that caller function has
> already performed work related to n_vclocks, and in this case, it is
> appropriate to perform n_vclocks check and n_vclocks_mux lock in caller
> function.

Can you be a little less abstract in this explanation, given that
ptp_vclock_in_use() only has a handful of callers?
For ptp_clock_freerun() do you mean the ->has_cycles check?