lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [Oct]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH] kasan: convert kasan/quarantine_lock to raw_spinlock
On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 11:53 AM, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
<bigeasy@linutronix.de> wrote:
> On 2018-10-10 11:45:32 [+0200], Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
>> > Should I repost Clark's patch?
>>
>>
>> I am much more comfortable with just changing the type of the lock.
>
> Yes, that is what Clark's patch does. Should I resent it?


Yes. Clark's patch looks good to me. Probably would be useful to add a
comment as to why raw spinlock is used (otherwise somebody may
refactor it back later).


>> What are the bad implications of using the raw spinlock? Will it help
>> to do something along the following lines:
>>
>> // Because of ...
>> #if CONFIG_RT
>> #define quarantine_spinlock_t raw_spinlock_t
>> #else
>> #define quarantine_spinlock_t spinlock_t
>> #endif
>
> no. For !RT spinlock_t and raw_spinlock_t are the same. For RT
> spinlock_t does not disable interrupts or preemption while
> raw_spinlock_t does.
> Therefore holding a raw_spinlock_t might increase your latency.

Ack.

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-10-10 11:58    [W:0.118 / U:1.164 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site