netdev - Re: [PATCH net 1/3] kref: add kref_sub

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:	Wed, 12 Feb 2014 23:05:06 -0500 (EST)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	gregkh@...uxfoundation.org
Cc:	mst@...hat.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, jasowang@...hat.com,
	virtio-dev@...ts.oasis-open.org,
	virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	qinchuanyu@...wei.com, joern@...fs.org, anatol.pomozov@...il.com,
	nab@...ux-iscsi.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net 1/3] kref: add kref_sub_return

From: Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2014 17:39:02 -0800

> Yes, that's horrible as well, but as was already pointed out in this
> thread, you can't rely on that value to really be "1" after reading it
> due to the way krefs work, what happened if someone else just grabbed
> it?
> 
> If all they want is a "count" for when to start polling, then use a
> separate atomic count, but don't abuse the kref interface for this, I
> don't think that will work properly at all.

They want to know which thread of control decrements the count to "1"
as buffers are released.

That seems entirely reasonable to me.

They could add another atomic counter for this, but that's rather
silly since the kref already has an atomic they can use for this
purpose.
--
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