linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RFC] Make call_srcu() available during very early boot

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:   Fri, 17 Aug 2018 09:08:42 -0700
From:   Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To:     "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc:     Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>, joel@...lfernandes.org,
        mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com, peterz@...radead.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] Make call_srcu() available during very early boot

Hello,

On Tue, Aug 14, 2018 at 10:06:18AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > Is there a way we could make a union, or reuse one of the other fields,
> > as we know that synchronize_srcu() can't be used yet (and if it is,
> > either warn, or just make it a nop). And when we call srcu_init() and
> > remove the srcu_struct from the list, we can then initialize whatever
> > we used as the temporary boot up list field.
> 
> I will take a look.  If nothing else, I could union it with the
> struct work_struct, since it cannot be used that early anyway.  ;-)
> 
> Or I could just use the work_struct that is already inside the struct
> work_struct.  Tejun, would you be OK with that?

Hmm... not super against it given how specialized the whole thing is
but maybe just making it a union is cleaner?

Thanks.

-- 
tejun