netdev - Re: [PATCH 06/12] BKL: Remove BKL from capifs

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:	Sat, 18 Sep 2010 09:55:09 +0200
From:	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 06/12] BKL: Remove BKL from capifs

On Saturday 18 September 2010 01:35:30 David Miller wrote:
> 
> From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
> Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2010 19:46:19 +0200
> 
> > The BKL is only used in fill_super, which is  protected by the superblocks
> > s_umount rw_semaphore. Therefore it is safe to remove the BKL entirely.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
> > Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org
> 
> I've searched Linus's tree, net-2.6, and net-next-2.6 and I cannot
> find one reference to lock_kernel() in drivers/isdn/capi/capifs.c
> in any of them.
> 
> What did you write this patch against?

As I wrote in my [PATCH 0/12], it applies on top of the pushdown
of the BKL into the get_sb operation, and I intend to submit it
to Linus with the full series.

I agree that this particular patch is a bit pointless because
all it does is to undo the change from the pushdown. I guess
that at the time when the first patch was written, the BKL
was still present in other parts of capifs.

	Arnd
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html