linux-kernel - Re: [JANITOR PROPOSAL] Switch ioctl functions to ->unlocked

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: <20080110092528.GA25076@one.firstfloor.org>
Date:	Thu, 10 Jan 2008 10:25:28 +0100
From:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
To:	Rolf Eike Beer <eike-kernel@...tec.de>
Cc:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org, paolo.ciarrocchi@...il.com,
	gorcunov@...il.com
Subject: Re: [JANITOR PROPOSAL] Switch ioctl functions to ->unlocked_ioctl

> Can you explain the rationale behind that running on the BKL? What type of 

It used to always run with the BKL because everything used to 
and originally nobody wanted to review all ioctl handlers in tree to see if 
they can run with more fine grained locking. A lot probably can though.

> things needs to be protected so that this huge hammer is needed? What would 
> be an earlier point to release the BKL?

That depends on the driver. A lot don't need BKL at all and 
in others it can be easily eliminated. But it needs case-by-case
review of the locking situation.

The goal of the proposal here is just to make it more visible.

-Andi
--
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/