netdev - Re: [PATCH net v5 1/5] bnx2x: protect different statistics flows

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: <20130812.212402.138911128487906526.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:	Mon, 12 Aug 2013 21:24:02 -0700 (PDT)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	stephen@...workplumber.org
Cc:	dmitry@...adcom.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org, eilong@...adcom.com,
	ariele@...adcom.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net v5 1/5] bnx2x: protect different statistics flows

From: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@...workplumber.org>
Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2013 17:12:08 -0700

> On Tue, 13 Aug 2013 02:24:59 +0300
> "Dmitry Kravkov" <dmitry@...adcom.com> wrote:
> 
>> +	bool					stats_started;
>> +	struct semaphore			stats_sema;
> 
> Is there a reason to use a counting semaphore? Do you expect it to
> be held across user process boundary? or want count > 1?
> 
> Use of semaphores as a locking primitive is discouraged,
> instead us a mutex.

Would you please look at the feedback I gave these guys to the
previous iteration of these changes?

They were using custom locking primitives and semaphores gave
the best approximation to the semantics they were looking for.

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