| 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
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2009 17:17:52 +0100 From: Pavel Machek <pavel@...e.cz> To: Roger Larsson <roger.larsson@...atan.se> Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Robert Love <rml@...h9.net> Subject: Re: PROBLEM: in_atomic() misuse all over the place On Wed 2009-01-28 00:10:37, Roger Larsson wrote: > (resent, non html) > > [1.] One line summary of the problem: > in_atomic() is used to select path of execution, most likely to suppress > warning logs when running a preemptive kernel. > > [2.] Full description of the problem/report: > > The problem is that in_atomic() only works on preemptive kernels... > > Result: preemptive kernel warns about a potential deadlock in all kernels, > developer silence with the help of in_atomic() > bug remains in SMP/UP kernels... I guess in_atomic() should be renamed to unreliable_in_atomic... because it does not really reliably tell you if you are in atomic section or not. Or we could negate the logic and call it maybe_kernel_context()? gfp_any() also needs a better name. pick_right_gfp_if_you_are_in_kernel_or_softirq_context() sounds suitable :-). Pavel -- (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek (cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html -- 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists