On Tue, Jun 10, 2025 at 08:22:59PM -0400, Paul Moore wrote: > On Wed, May 28, 2025 at 8:19 AM David Howells <dhowe...@redhat.com> wrote: > > > > Hi Linus, > > > > Could you apply this, please? There shouldn't be any functional change, > > rather it's a switch to using combined bit-barrier ops and lesser barriers. > > A better way to do this might be to provide set_bit_release(), but the end > > result would be much the same. > > > > Thanks, > > David > > --- > > From: Herbert Xu <herb...@gondor.apana.org.au> > > > > KEYS: Invert FINAL_PUT bit > > > > Invert the FINAL_PUT bit so that test_bit_acquire and clear_bit_unlock > > can be used instead of smp_mb. > > > > Signed-off-by: Herbert Xu <herb...@gondor.apana.org.au> > > Signed-off-by: David Howells <dhowe...@redhat.com> > > Reviewed-by: Jarkko Sakkinen <jar...@kernel.org> > > cc: keyri...@vger.kernel.org > > cc: linux-security-mod...@vger.kernel.org > > cc: linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org > > cc: linux-integr...@vger.kernel.org > > --- > > include/linux/key.h | 2 +- > > security/keys/gc.c | 4 ++-- > > security/keys/key.c | 5 +++-- > > 3 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) > > It doesn't look like this has made its way to Linus. David or Jarkko, > do one of you want to pick this up into a tree and send this to Linus > properly?
I'm open for anything but need comment from David at first. It is up to him as he carries the torch ATM for this one :-) BR, Jarkko
