lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2017]   [Aug]   [16]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH v4] livepatch: introduce shadow variable API
From
Date
On 08/16/2017 08:43 AM, Miroslav Benes wrote:
>
>> [ ... snip ... ]
>
> There is a comment above about locking and we do not take the spinlock
> here. That could surprise someone. So I'd keep only klp_shadow_add()
> comment, because there it is strictly needed. It depends on the context in
> all other cases.

Good catch, I think this changed in this last version when I moved some
of the work outside the lock.

> Could you also add a comment above klp_shadow_lock definition about what
> it aims to protect?
>

How about "klp_shadow_lock provides exclusive access to the
klp_shadow_hash and the shadow variables it references." or were
thinking of something more detailed?

>> + /* Look for <obj, id> again under the lock */
>> + spin_lock_irqsave(&klp_shadow_lock, flags);
>> + shadow_data = klp_shadow_get(obj, id);
>> + if (unlikely(shadow_data)) {
>
> shadow_data is not needed anywhere, so you could do the same as for the
> first speculative search and remove shadow_data variable all together.

Ok.

>> [ ... snip ... ]
>
> Otherwise it looks good. You can add my
>
> Acked-by: Miroslav Benes <mbenes@suse.cz>
>
> with those nits fixed.

Thank you for all the suggestions and reviews!

-- Joe

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2017-08-16 15:41    [W:0.191 / U:16.776 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site