| 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: Sun, 26 Dec 2010 21:12:05 +0800 From: Yong Zhang <yong.zhang0@...il.com> To: Hillf Danton <dhillf@...il.com> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] fix unsafe operation in high resolution timer On Sat, Dec 25, 2010 at 10:19:11PM +0800, Hillf Danton wrote: > > But for a hrtimer which is not free in its callback, like a > > static defined one. the hrtimer could be referenced at the same > > time. So here you cann't just delete the two lines. > > After callback, as you agree, it is hard to determine in the current > implementation if the hrtimer is static defined, though another bit > could be added, say, in the flag word of hrtimer Yeah, that is an option, like a flag FREE_IN_CALLBACK/ONESHOT which indicate that. Or just let the callback return another value like HRTIMER_FREED. But as I said before I'm not sure what's the best way to fix that. And maybe there's more suitable method. BTW, is there any user who free the hrtimer in its callback? > , so cutting the two > lines off is deserved. > And more, who will take care of the NORESTART again after callback? It's not related to NORESTART, just HRTIMER_STATE_CALLBACK. hrtimer'strategy somehow depends on HRTIMER_STATE_CALLBACK. You can take a look at the caller of hrtimer_callback_running(). Thanks, Yong -- 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