netdev - Re: [PATCH] Merge GT/MV642xx Support into MV643xx Driver [7/8]

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: <46A01992.1060907@realitydiluted.com>
Date:	Thu, 19 Jul 2007 21:10:26 -0500
From:	"Steven J. Hill" <sjhill@...litydiluted.com>
To:	Dale Farnsworth <dale@...nsworth.org>
CC:	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Merge GT/MV642xx Support into MV643xx Driver [7/8]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Dale Farnsworth wrote:
> 
> You have replaced the use of the global PHY spinlock with a per-port spinlock.
> However, the SMI register is shared by all ports.  The global lock is
> needed to prevent simultaneous updates of the register by drivers for
> multiple ports.
> 
> NAK
>
Are you sure? Notice that a majority of the spinlocks were changed to disable
IRQs. Secondly, the lowest level mv_read/mv_write functions have to acquire
the big mv64x60_lock before they can read or write registers. I see the PHY
spinlock as being an additional and unnecessary lock to contend with. Am I
make an improper assumption?

- -Steve
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFGoBmSgyK5H2Ic36cRAj8JAKCfmg/T2FgOdYZ5YfnXJsiyn3RkaQCfadSk
GS8ICyW0+qNRHr5QqnY0PUQ=
=nvSB
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html