| 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: Thu, 14 Apr 2011 09:29:13 +0800 From: Huang Ying <ying.huang@...el.com> To: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com> CC: Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>, "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@...el.com>, "linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH -v3 3/4] lib, Make gen_pool memory allocator lockless On 04/14/2011 05:07 AM, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote: > * Huang Ying (ying.huang@...el.com) wrote: > [...] >> + * rcu_read_lock and rcu_read_unlock is not used int gen_pool_alloc, >> + * gen_pool_free, gen_pool_avail and gen_pool_size etc, because chunks >> + * are only added into pool, not deleted from pool unless the pool >> + * itself is destroyed. If chunk will be deleted from pool, >> + * rcu_read_lock and rcu_read_unlock should be uses in these >> + * functions. > > So how do you protect between pool destruction and adding chunks into > the pool ? Because the pool itself will be freed when destruction, we need some mechanism outside of pool. For example, if gen_pool_add() is called via device file IOCTL, we must un-register the device file first, and destroy the pool after the last reference to device has gone. Best Regards, Huang Ying -- 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