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:	Thu, 07 Jun 2012 10:31:00 -0400
From:	Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@...hat.com>
To:	mihailov ivan <mihailov.iaa@...il.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] change lock model in aio_put_req

mihailov ivan <mihailov.iaa@...il.com> writes:

> Why used spin_lock/unlock_irq instead of
> spin_lock_irqsave/spin_unlock_irqrestore?

Because the function is never called from interrupt context.

> __aio_put_req it's interrupt safe call but why aio_put_req not?

__aio_put_req is called with the ctx lock already taken.  This (the __
routine being called with the lock held) is a fairly common convention
in the kernel.

Nack.  Your patch doesn't fix anything.

Cheers,
Jeff
--
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

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ