lists.openwall.net   lists  /  announce  john-users  owl-users  popa3d-users  /  xvendor  oss-security  /  Bugtraq  Full-Disclosure  linux-kernel  linux-netdev  linux-ext4 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
 
This website is powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux security-enhanced OS
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [month] [year] [list]
Date:	Fri, 1 Feb 2008 01:13:55 +0100
From:	Andrea Arcangeli <andrea@...ranet.com>
To:	Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com>
Subject: Re: mmu_notifier: Move mmu_notifier_release up to get rid of the
	invalidat_all() callback

On Thu, Jan 31, 2008 at 02:21:58PM -0800, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> Is this okay for KVM too?

->release isn't implemented at all in KVM, only the list_del generates
complications.

I think current code could be already safe through the mm_count pin,
becasue KVM relies on the fact anybody pinning through mm_count like
KVM does, is forbidden to call unregister and it's forced to wait the
auto-disarming when mm_users hits zero, but I feel like something's
still wrong if I think that I'm not using call_rcu to free the
notifier (OTOH we agreed the list had to be frozen and w/o readers
(modulo _release) before _release is called, so if this initial
assumption is ok it seems I may be safe w/o call_rcu?).

But it's really tricky path. Anyway this is the last of my worries
right now, it works perfectly fine with a single user obviously, and
the moment KVM threads runs remotely through GRU/XPMEM isn't happening
too soon ;) so let's concentrate on the rest first. I can say
hlist_del_init doesn't seem to provide any benefit given nobody could
possibly decide to call register or unregister after _release run.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Hosted by DataForce ISP - Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux