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  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:	Thu, 06 Dec 2007 21:29:58 -0400
From:	Kevin Winchester <>
To:	Daniel Walker <>
CC:	Ingo Molnar <>,,,,,
Subject: Possible locking issue in viotape.c

Daniel Walker wrote:
> I've posted all the ones I've done so far ..
> Feel free to review or test them.. I've found it pretty easy to simply
> grep for certain class of semaphore usage, check if it's conforming to
> the mutex requirements, then convert it or not.. Checking them is
> getting to be a habit, so I don't think a list would help me.. However,
> someone else might be able to use it..

Thanks, that helps me not duplicate anything.  One of the first ones I
was looking at (before your post) was viotape.c, which is in your patch
set.  However, looking at the uses of the semaphore, I see that on line
409-410 the following code:

        if (noblock)
                return count;

which seems to ignore the fact that the semaphore has been downed (not
to mention the dma buffer and op struct allocations.  I think it should be:

	if (noblock)
		ret = count;
		goto free_dma;

instead.  Do you want to make sure I'm right about that and fold it into
your patch?  Or have you already submitted your patch (or should it be
in a separate patch?  Alternatively, I can submit the patch if you don't
want to bother with it.

Kevin Winchester
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists