linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V4 1/1] rcu: introduce kfree

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 15 Mar 2011 14:11:33 +0100
From:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To:	Lai Jiangshan <laijs@...fujitsu.com>,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Manfred Spraul <manfred@...orfullife.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V4 1/1] rcu: introduce kfree_rcu()

Le mardi 15 mars 2011 à 17:46 +0800, Lai Jiangshan a écrit :


> --- a/kernel/rcutiny.c
> +++ b/kernel/rcutiny.c
> @@ -167,7 +167,7 @@ static void rcu_process_callbacks(struct rcu_ctrlblk *rcp)
>  		prefetch(next);
>  		debug_rcu_head_unqueue(list);
>  		local_bh_disable();
> -		list->func(list);
> +		__rcu_reclaim(list);
>  		local_bh_enable();
>  		list = next;
>  		RCU_TRACE(cb_count++);

Paul, I am just wondering why we disable BH before calling list->func()

This should be done in callbacks that really need it ?

At least the disable/enable pair is not necessary before calling kfree()



--
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/