linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/3] of: Support hashtable lookups for phandles

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 10 May 2016 09:26:11 -0500
From:	Rob Herring <robherring2@...il.com>
To:	Pantelis Antoniou <pantelis.antoniou@...sulko.com>
Cc:	Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
	Frank Rowand <frowand.list@...il.com>,
	Matt Porter <mporter@...sulko.com>,
	Grant Likely <grant.likely@...retlab.ca>,
	Koen Kooi <koen@...inion.thruhere.net>,
	Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>,
	Marek Vasut <marex@...x.de>,
	"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] of: Support hashtable lookups for phandles

On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 8:45 AM, Pantelis Antoniou
<pantelis.antoniou@...sulko.com> wrote:
> Hi Rob,
>
>> On May 10, 2016, at 00:11 , Rob Herring <robherring2@...il.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, May 9, 2016 at 3:38 PM, Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org> wrote:
>>> Hi Pantelis,
>>>
>>> On Mon, May 9, 2016 at 8:11 PM, Pantelis Antoniou
>>> <pantelis.antoniou@...sulko.com> wrote:
>>>> --- a/drivers/of/base.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/of/base.c
>>>
>>>> @@ -1073,9 +1097,14 @@ struct device_node *of_find_node_by_phandle(phandle handle)
>>>>                return NULL;
>>>>
>>>>        raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&devtree_lock, flags);
>>>> -       for_each_of_allnodes(np)
>>>> -               if (np->phandle == handle)
>>>> -                       break;
>>>> +       /* when we're ready use the hash table */
>>>> +       if (of_phandle_ht_available() && !in_interrupt())
>>>
>>> I guess the !in_interrupt() test is because of the locking inside
>>> rhashtable_lookup_fast()?
>>
>> Not a use we should support. Just warn for anyone parsing DT in
>> interrupt context.
>>
>
> That’s not about users calling in interrupt context. It’s when we’re
> very early in the boot sequence we’re under interrupt context and
> calls to the hash methods cannot be made.

I don't understand. When exactly are we in interrupt context?

Rob