netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 01/24] locking/local_lock: Introduce guard definition for local

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: <e6509e106251c10a9f65bf5e520911cda26060a6.camel@redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 18 Dec 2023 09:16:49 +0100
From: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>
To: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>, 
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Boqun Feng
 <boqun.feng@...il.com>,  Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>, Eric
 Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>,
 Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Peter
 Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
 Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>, Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 01/24] locking/local_lock: Introduce guard
 definition for local_lock.

On Fri, 2023-12-15 at 18:07 +0100, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> Introduce lock guard definition for local_lock_t. There are no users
> yet.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>
> ---
>  include/linux/local_lock.h | 11 +++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 11 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/include/linux/local_lock.h b/include/linux/local_lock.h
> index e55010fa73296..706c4b65d9449 100644
> --- a/include/linux/local_lock.h
> +++ b/include/linux/local_lock.h
> @@ -51,4 +51,15 @@
>  #define local_unlock_irqrestore(lock, flags)			\
>  	__local_unlock_irqrestore(lock, flags)
>  
> +DEFINE_LOCK_GUARD_1(local_lock, local_lock_t,
> +		    local_lock(_T->lock),
> +		    local_unlock(_T->lock))
> +DEFINE_LOCK_GUARD_1(local_lock_irq, local_lock_t,
> +		    local_lock_irq(_T->lock),
> +		    local_unlock_irq(_T->lock))

DEFINE_GUARD should fit for the 2 above, right?

Cheers,

Paolo