netdev - Re: [PATCH net-2.6] be2net: use mutex instead of spin lock for mbox

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: <20101216.141200.242127421.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:	Thu, 16 Dec 2010 14:12:00 -0800 (PST)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	ivecera@...hat.com
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org, sathyap@...verengines.com,
	subbus@...verengines.com, sarveshwarb@...verengines.com,
	ajitk@...verengines.com, bhutchings@...arflare.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-2.6] be2net: use mutex instead of spin lock for
 mbox_lock

From: Ivan Vecera <ivecera@...hat.com>
Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2010 16:43:19 +0100

> On Tue, 2010-12-14 at 14:21 +0000, Ben Hutchings wrote:
>> On Tue, 2010-12-14 at 14:46 +0100, Ivan Vecera wrote:
>> > Since the mbox polling uses the schedule_timeout, the mbox_lock should be
>> > a semaphore and not a spin lock.
>> > The commit f25b03a replaced udelay() with schedule_timeout() but didn't
>> > change the mbox_lock to a semaphore or a mutex.
>> [...]
>> 
>> I see no reason for this to be a semaphore; use a mutex instead.
>> 
>> Ben
> Ok, Ben... the new version
> 
> Since the mbox polling uses the schedule_timeout, the mbox_lock should be
> a mutex and not a spin lock.
> The commit f25b03a replaced udelay() with schedule_timeout() but didn't
> change mbox_lock to semaphore or mutex.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Ivan Vecera <ivecera@...hat.com>

Applied, thanks.
--
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