linux-kernel - Re: [patch]block: fix ioc locking warning

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:	Mon, 6 Feb 2012 08:58:49 -0800
From:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Cc:	Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@...hat.com>, Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
	Shaohua Li <vivek.goyal2008@...il.com>,
	lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Knut Petersen <Knut_Petersen@...nline.de>, mroos@...ux.ee
Subject: Re: [patch]block: fix ioc locking warning

On Mon, Feb 6, 2012 at 8:44 AM, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> Yeah, this seems better to me.  Jens, if you're gonna amend the
> commit, please consider collapsing the following patch into the
> original patch too.  Thanks.

Guys, is it *really* worth it to do all these crazy games?

How bad is it to just always use the async freeing, instead of this
clearly very fragile crazy direct-freeing-with-serious-locking-issues
thing?

Sure, even ioc_release_fn() isn't trivial wrt lock handling, but at
least it doesn't have to play these *insane* games with recursive
locking.

And if workqueues are too expensive, what saner alternatives might
there be? This code really is insane.

                Linus
--
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/