netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v12 1/5] net: Introduce generic failover module

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:   Sat, 26 May 2018 09:43:16 +0200
From:   Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
To:     Stephen Hemminger <stephen@...workplumber.org>
Cc:     Sridhar Samudrala <sridhar.samudrala@...el.com>, mst@...hat.com,
        davem@...emloft.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
        virtio-dev@...ts.oasis-open.org, jesse.brandeburg@...el.com,
        alexander.h.duyck@...el.com, kubakici@...pl, jasowang@...hat.com,
        loseweigh@...il.com, aaron.f.brown@...el.com,
        anjali.singhai@...el.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v12 1/5] net: Introduce generic failover module

Sat, May 26, 2018 at 12:37:44AM CEST, stephen@...workplumber.org wrote:
>On Thu, 24 May 2018 09:55:13 -0700
>Sridhar Samudrala <sridhar.samudrala@...el.com> wrote:
>
>
>> +	spin_lock(&failover_lock);
>
>Since register is not in fast path, this should be a mutex?

I don't get it. Why would you prefer mutex over spinlock here?