linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 08/23] clocksource: drop duplicate register checking

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]

Message-ID: <20070131171957.GE4468@elte.hu>
Date:	Wed, 31 Jan 2007 18:19:57 +0100
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To:	Daniel Walker <dwalker@...sta.com>
Cc:	akpm@...l.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, johnstul@...ibm.com,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 08/23] clocksource: drop duplicate register checking


* Daniel Walker <dwalker@...sta.com> wrote:

> >          if (is_registered_source(c)) {
> >                  printk("register_clocksource: Cannot register %s. "
> >                         "Already registered!", c->name);
> >                  ret = -EBUSY;
> > 
> > and Thomas' change keeps that property, but doesnt printk. Your 
> > change makes double registry possible, potentially crashing the 
> > kernel later on! (And this isnt theoretical, double registry did 
> > happen in practice when i debugged suspend problems on my SMP 
> > laptop.)
> 
> My original patch set makes the duplicate register checking better 
> (which I dropped) .. I'll be happy to reintroduce that part of it..

why if Thomas' patch: simplify-the-registration-of-clocksources.patch 
already does it?

	Ingo
-
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/